How to Improve this submission?
Hi, Im not too sure on where to go with this or what I can change so I would appreciate any advice. The Pokestop Im nominating is a Little Library which is a good stop location. I have been rejected 2 times for it and I dont really understand why. The email reasons given are,
"Thank you for nominating The Dearham Wood Little Library on Nov 16, 2020. Upon review by the Niantic community of players, we regret to inform you that this nomination is ineligible.
This nomination has been rejected due to the following reason(s):
Nomination does not meet acceptance criteria, Nomination does not appear to be permanent or appears to be a seasonal display that is only put up during certain times of the year, The real-world location of the nomination appears to be on private residential property or farm."
I am not entirely sure what about this is "temporary or seasonal" so I feel like that aspect is being judged extremely unfairly. This has been around for almost a year now and has not been taken away or anything. Im assuming people look at google maps and assume it doesn't exist even though Google Maps is not updated that frequently, and the capture there was from August 2019. Otherwise I dont understand this unless people are thinking just because they were creative and used a filing cabinet its not a lasting thing or something.
Now in regards to the private property thing, I dont entirely understand it. I feel like this is a case of just nitpicking on some reviewers parts. I would argue most Little Libraries, and a lot of the ones I see as valid stops, are at the end of peoples lawns with access to it from the sidewalk or street. It is an extremely common thing and to me that sort of signifies the aspect that they want people to have access to it. I dont know if people look at it and feel like people would trespass or whatever to get to the stop, but with the pictures you can clearly see its easily accessible by the sidewalk with no need to even step on the small section of the lawn. Additionally, the owner of the house wants it to become a Pokestop for people to use and enjoy. (Info blacked out for obvious reasons)
I know this obviously doesn't make it more eligible but I feel like that's pretty indicative of the aspect that they would love to have it as a stop. I am not sure if including links to something like that on the nomination would be more helpful or worth adding.
Any information on what I can do to make this nomination not get rejected again would be appreciated. I dont know if Im expected to tell them to move the library across the sidewalk so its on the boulevard. I just want some advice as this is extremely frustrating and I feel like its being rejected rather unfairly.
In my eyes, it really looks like someone just put it there and can easily take it away again. I would give 1* unpermanent aswell. The library is only sitting on a stone and isnt attached. You can maybe proove this wrong if you have a weblink to anything that prooves, that this is a permanent free library. Otherwise I donot see a lot of hope.
It looks like temporary I think due to the placing on the tiles. It looks like it can easily be removed.
As for private property, even if the owner agrees the rule is that nominations at private property, how great they may be, are not acceptable. Don't judge on other LFL that are accepted in the past.
TLDR - don't resubmit it its never going to pass.
For a more in depth answer and clarity I'll answer the rejection reasons individually for you.
Temporary / seasonal
Reviewers would have marked it as such due to the fact its not a fixed (at least it doesn't appear to be from your pictures) point of interest. Most Little Free Libraries (LFL's) are usually mounted / fixed in a permanent location i.e. mounted onto a wodden pole in the ground, or are an item of city infrastructure that has been repurposed i.e. a disused phone both turned into a LFL.
Whilst I applaud the initiative of the people in using a filing cabinet, its not secured in place and is just rested on a concrete slab, it does look like it can be picked up and moved at any point.
I don't doubt you in saying that its been there a while, but because it looks temporary and isn't secured its always going to fall into the temporary/ seasonal reject category.
Unless you have categorical proof that its permanent, e.g. a news article stating its a permanent community installation, then i dont see you getting away with it not being rejected as temporary.
Doesnt meet criteria.
This is wrong, LFL's are done by the community for the community, so they fall under exploration and a great place to be social with others and fully meet eligibility criteria.
Ignore this reason, its either been chosen in error or by someone who doesn't know what the criteria is.
Private Residential Property (PRP)
Niantics view on dealing with PRP is that if a Point if Interest (POI) is on PRP then its not acceptable, no ifs, no buts, no maybes.
There is absolutely no exception for being able to access the POI when standing adjacent to it, in this instance accessing the LFL from the sidewalk, if it is on PRP then it is invalid.
In summary, as its on PRP then its a complete non starter of. a submission I'm afraid.
Even if you could address the issue of it appearing to be temporary, the PRP issue will still always cause it to be rejected.
In this instance you will need to chalk this one up to experience and move on.
It's clear that it's in a private property, so it won't be approved.
It doesn't matter that it's on the edge and that the owner wants it to be available for anyone, the current rules say No.
If an object appears to be on private residential property (i.e. an single family home), then it is ineligible. This object very much appears to be on private residential property, even when you tried to conveniently angle the house out of the shot.
Thank you everyone for the information and summary
I dont really appreciate your weird sort of insinuation and trying to be sarcastic with the last sentence. When it asked me for a picture of the surrounding area I thought being able to show it was in a safe location with safe pedestrian access (AKA one of the things that its rated on) so that is why I used that picture. I am not trying to "conveniently angle the house out of the shot" as you can easily identify where it would be on google maps with the tree and sidewalk in the picture I gave.