Who are these people that reject things without proper explanations etc?

rufoushumming-PGOrufoushumming-PGO Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭✭✭
edited July 2021 in Criteria Clarifications

I have just had a nomination rejected.

The excuse - The nomination appears to contain extraneous objects or identifiers not representativve of the nomination. Nomination appears to be a natural feature (waterfall, mountain, lake, etc) that is not connected to a man-made object.) Nomination does not meet acceptance criteria.

I see way points at Newtown for a water bubbler. A storm over flow pipe at Rose Bay. Survey Marks left right and centre and this is rejected for a non existant reason. My comment here is about the silly rejection excuse!!!!

It is a small reserve on Chaleyer Street. This reserve is on Google Maps. Street View shows it. It is listed by Waverley Council as a small nature reserve. Sure it is tiny. Sure it has a water bubbler and a bench in it.I proide photos of it that are clearly almost exactly the same as Street view. My nominated google map placement is almost exactly on the Google map marker that says Chaleyer Street Reserve. It is a place to socialise and to stop and rest on your walks. With grass and trees.

DID YOU BOTHER to look at the photo. Look at Street View. Look at the normal Map view. Did you look at the evidence link to Waverley Council list of local parks and reserves.

It is like my local cafe getting rejected because it did not meet criteria. Even though it is a great place to socialise. It is the only cafe for 500m in one direction ad 2000m in all other directions - so you have to exercise to get to it. With a great mural on the inside and painted on the outside to look way older. And this system accepts Starbucks and Gazebos...The reviewer did not even give an excuse.

There is a set of reviewers who DO NOT know the criteria. AND importantly DO NOT READ or engage with the nomination. I find it mind boggling, depressing and disappointing.

When it is right it is right. And I get it and accept it. And if I disagree I nominate again.. But these .... AAAAAARGHHHH. And yes I know the system. I review myself. I put effort in... Have the respect to do the same... Please ;-)

Post edited by NianticGiffard on


  • wbguy88-PGOwbguy88-PGO Posts: 18 ✭✭

    I’ve never understood that also. I read somewhere there are reviewers that go and just deny all kinds of stuff to get their upgrades fast. I am like my work ethic even in just reviewing I feel like I should take the time to read and check websites before committing to my review as they put in the work to submit.

  • rufoushumming-PGOrufoushumming-PGO Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 2021

    Chaleyer Street Reserve - Waverley Park

    Rose Bay





    Tiny community park middle way up Chaleyer Street. A public place to appreciate open spaces with bench to sit on under the trees and chat with friends, water bubbler to keep cool and lots of quiet. Close by to Dunny Lane Steps. Half way between Rose Bay and cliff top walks. Great little place to rest when out exercising. Social gathering spot for community. Pretty unique as quite small for a public reserve and is identified as #66 in a list of the LGA Waverley public parks

    Location Terms of Use

    83 Chaleyer St, Rose Bay NSW 2029, Australia

    Supplemental Information

    Quiet community park where people socialise and relax. It is a good resting point when walking from Rose Bay to North Bondi or the cliff walk. Safe pedestrian access and bus stops 7 minute walk away. Permanent park listed on Local Government Maps https://bit.ly/3hxq1Wm ((#66)) and easly seen on Google Street view. So a social space - a space that encourages enjoying a public park and or getting out. Safe and publically accessible.

  • rufoushumming-PGOrufoushumming-PGO Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 2021

    Thanks HaramDingo. My point is the rejection criteria sucks.

    So when something does not have something to attach the POI to then it is important to look at the acceptance criteria. Is it a park? Is it local? Is it for the community? Does it provide a good place to stop when exercising (it has a water stop)? I use the bench to sit on. I use the bubbler to fill my water bottle up. My neighbours use the water bubbler for their dogs. Does it encourage people to get out, explore. Is it a destination? Yes yes and yes from a local community perspective yes. The criteria does not require something to hang the nomination on.

    Let me quote

    A great place for exercise

    ""A place you'd go to get some fresh air, stretch your legs, or exercise. Places that encourage walking, exercising, and enjoying public spaces. Or something that teaches or encourages us to be our healthiest selves.""

    Yes people use it when walking their dogs - stopping to rest while walking. Refreshing with water while running, biking or walking the dogs or the kids need a drink.

    Or ""A great place to be social with others

    A favorite gathering place for friends or strangers alike, where you can share a drink or meal, be entertained, or watch public life happen. Or something that draws us together to share an experience in a locally and culturally relevant way.""

    Yes. People come here to meet. You can watch public life - all be it as a slow rate. But it is a place to share relaxing and friendship in a local relavant way. Today I met the neighbours out with their dogs. (in a covid socially distanced way ;-)

    So I put effort in for an application like this. does it meet the criteria.... YES. Does it have something to pin it to like a sculpture, sign, fountain, vista, builidng. No. But the point of a way point is the criteria is multi facted as the criteria is aware not everything has something like a sign...

    Importantly the park is real. It is listed by Waverley council as a local park. I provide a link to the supporting information. Compared to many waypoints that get accepted this one meets criteria. The POI is the reserve itself.

    If you are going to reject it - come up with something good.

    PS - I created the Micro Playground park - after it was rejected! So I know to put the effort in. Particularly for something like this local park in Chaleyer Street.

    By the way the official name for the Dover Road micro park is (and it is eye catching) is Dover Road Closure Split Level - it is number 44 on the list of Waverly parks.

    And it too is listed as a local park. Waverley council splits them into 4 public space types. Park (like bondi or Bronte beach and gully) Sports (like Waverley or Williams Park), Neighbourhood (Such as Diamond Bay) and Local (like Chaleyer Reserve).

    Local parks are defined by Waverley LGA as: Providing open green space for primarily passive recreation. Provides green spaces to walk through. Includes small parks and parks on street verges and road closures and caters for immediate residents in the area. - I note recreation, social, walking - local communities in the criteria for both the LGA and the waypoint.

    So the criteria of the Waverley LGA definition for a local park looks remarkable similar to the criteria for a waypoint.

    Post edited by rufoushumming-PGO on
  • rufoushumming-PGOrufoushumming-PGO Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited July 2021

    Welllll. Hmmmmmm. Thanks @oscarc1-ING and @HaramDingo-ING G

    To be clear. There is nothing in the criteria that prohibits or makes the nomination in-eligible. That means the fact there is no sign is not an issue. The location is validated via multiple different ways. Including LGA documentation outlining where the park is and the type of park. Let alone Google Map view and Street view.

    In addition - the eligibility criteria are met and there is nothing in the rejection criteria that prohibits it.

    your right the nomination is the space itself. Not the faucet. Not the bench. Not the post. But the park itself. Which is allowed. That means though the supporting documentation better be good. Otherwise any spot could be nominated - which I hear in your post.

    @HaramDingo-ING - yeah my attitude. I get it. I am just grumpy at the lack of coherent rejection criteria. What was voiced does not meet a rightful rejection. If you are going to reject something please let me know clearly ;-) Because I accept it for good reason ;-) And if I feel it needs another nomination. I will go again. PS that was me on the Permanent Mark. Just thought I would test the water seeing how many State Markers get through ;-) Personally I would swap the PM for the Park!!!!

    But I do get the fine line you are talking about ;-) !!! Thank you again both for your insight

  • rufoushumming-PGOrufoushumming-PGO Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thanks !!1 I love all the input. I am no nearer knowing one way or the other.....

    And soory to be a bore @Jtronmoore-PGO but the criteria do not stipulate that. It is of course semantics. But there is nothing in the criteria that stipulates an anchor point. The key criteria is identifying it is a permanent physical, tangible and identifiable spot (which I have done) OR an object that placemarks an area (a sign, plaque, gazebo, etc etc etc)

    It was my choice to not to use the water bubbler or the bench. because well they are a benche and water bubl;er. Though I note I have seen a water bubbler as a way point. And I had I done so as I got slammed that just because the park has a bench and water bubbler does not mean anything.

    It is also important to note these are local parks. They can incredbly small (even smaller than this). It makes it incredibly difficult to take something that is so specific, so small and yet locally important. Is listed by local government as a park and the gov achknowledges the importance of these local parks to community. Yet has not core anchor point that some reviewer insist on.

    I am damned if I do. And damned if I don't. I got slammed for having a fountain or a bench in the photo. So all I am left with is the spot itself. For which I have provided ample evidence that it exists and its importance to government. Because I believe, if I as the nominator have doubt then, I need to provide the evidence and go over and beyond in proving it meets all the criteria required to be a waypoint.

    Sure I am happy to use the water bubbler as a feature to anchor the waypoint. As I have seen water bubblers as waypoints in themselves. But hey my nomination is the micro local park not the water bubbler......

    Sorry just frustrated and thank you for your good luck.

  • rufoushumming-PGOrufoushumming-PGO Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭✭✭

    oscarc1-ING -- Thanks....

    It is not a pick up or drop off point. There used to be a road that ran all the way through Reina Street. . The land was resumed and this little bit is all that is left. to be clear on your comments on usage. Wrong. It is used by locals. They meet there. They sit there. They take their dogs there. The gate is shut and locked the vast majority of the time.


    I get there are many parks. But many of those little spaces are not recognised by council as parks/reserves. This is and proof is provided. .

    The local council offically lists this as a local park and local parks are defined by Waverley LGA as: ""Providing open green space for primarily passive recreation. Provides green spaces to walk through. Includes small parks and parks on street verges and road closures and caters for immediate residents in the area.""

    PS I used to live at the bottom of Chaleyer Street. Trust me I know how it is used. Regarding criteria I have plenty of rejections. I only object to the rejections when they don't make sense. I see and hear what you say. And I take it all on board. It helps me nominate better and helps me be more objective when reviewing.

    Though am still struggling with playing fields and some signs......... and why survey marks are accepted so often.

    And I suspect that is why I get frustrated as it appears arbitary as to what is accepted. or not. I know it really is down to the reviewers reviewing and their interpretation of what is acceptable or what their goals are in accepting. So when I see some things accepted and something like this I am like whaaaaat the!!!!!

    Enough. Let us call this one quits. It is what it is ;-) And again thank you to all the feedback. Good discussion and insights.

    Now to sort out those peskly playing fields with AFL posts at one side, league posts on another, football at the other and the cricket pitch in middle. And depending on what time of year or the council all of those at once or only seasonal based. Now as a reviwer.. Never mind I put up a discussion on that one and still no advice!!!!!

  • fungasman-PGOfungasman-PGO Posts: 13 ✭✭

    I agree with most of the people, the park picture is just a view.. It's not an object so it's hard to place a way point.

  • HaramDingo-INGHaramDingo-ING Posts: 1,710 ✭✭✭✭✭

    This park nomination has returned to Wayfarer. For everyone's convenience and understanding, I am giving the liberty of presenting the nomination of this nomination to invite comments, feedback and any improvements (if applicable) to this nomination.


    Title: Chaleyer Street Reserve - a local pocket community park

    Description: Local community park on Chaleyer Street - #66 of the 79 council parks. A social spot to venture out to and favourite space to meet friends at and a stop to drink water. Bench to rest on - trees to chill under. In Waverley LGA - Parks are listed as Public, Sports, Neighbourhood and Local. Local is defined as an open green space for recreation, green spaces to walk through. Includes small parks and parks on street verges and road closures and caters for immediate residents in the area. This is a local park.

    Supporting Statement: Criteria (1) It is a social space to be- a space that encourages enjoying a public park and or getting out.. Criteria (2) it is a space for fresh air - to stretch legs - supporting of exercise (with water stop). Criteria (3) a destination of local interest. Criteria (4) it is safe and publically accessible. Criteria (5) easily identifiable. In Waverley Parks are listed as Public (Bondi/Bronte), Sports (Waverley/Williams), Neighbour hood (Diamond Bay) and Local. This is a local park - it is physically tangible and is listed on the Waverley Local Government Maps https://bit.ly/3hxq1Wm ((#66)) . Criteria (6) Clearly described with clear title and photo. Criteria (7) meets two of the three eligibility criteria. Criteria (8) Permanent (see council listing above) and easly verified on Google map (listed as a reserve) and street view. Local parks are defined by Waverley LGA as: Providing open green space for primarily passive recreation. Provides green spaces to walk through. Includes small parks and parks on street verges and road closures and caters for immediate residents in the area.


    I will not make any further comments.

  • VladDraco-PGOVladDraco-PGO Posts: 560 ✭✭✭✭

    Your supportive statement is too long and, in my feeling, offensive.

    Just "This local park is listed on the Waverley Local Government Maps https://bit.ly/3hxq1Wm ((#66))" is a very strong and sufficient point for me, as a reviewer, i will put 5* based on this one (instead of 1* for the full statement, as a try to push a vote.)

  • rodensteiner-INGrodensteiner-ING Posts: 1,677 ✭✭✭✭✭

    ba i love how people will appeal this 1* submissions.

    The louder they cry!

  • MargariteDVille-INGMargariteDVille-ING Posts: 2,665 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I've come to wonder if Niantic loves controversy and angst like this. Any publicity is good publicity. Otherwise, why would they continue to be vague on things like this? Some people read one thing, while others see it as something else. Some people want to nominate any spit of land, while others want something concrete and interesting. Some people think only of the one game that they play, while others try to imagine a world of interesting things.

  • Zuddy1-PGOZuddy1-PGO Posts: 12 ✭✭

    Well I can tell you, they will band you for 24 if you approve of to many lol. Not sure about the rejection.

  • EdeImarzipan-PGOEdeImarzipan-PGO Posts: 18 ✭✭

    without the description i would have 100% rejected but this seems legit.

    There is a rule somewhere that says no vandalism. You could see the graffiti as vandalism.

    The park is really ugly so subjectively i would not see it as a poi

    2 stars maybe in the end

  • pinediablo-PGOpinediablo-PGO Posts: 25 ✭✭

    I would have approved it. I don't care if you think it's a significant enough park or not, that it's just a bench and a tree. It's clearly a neat little local thing, we don't have pocket parks like that in my area. If I'm in that area and I'm tryna explore, guess what? That one wayspot has a scyther nearby and a bench? Sick, I'm there!

    That lengthy supporting info is great! The local government says it's officially a park??? Why would I not approve that?

    It's a local curiosity of a park that would make a PERFECT wayspot in my opinion.

  • MargariteDVille-INGMargariteDVille-ING Posts: 2,665 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You never said what reasons were given in your rejection.

    If it's within 40m of a Single Family Residence, maybe Niantic themselves rejected it. Their lawsuit settlement includes:

    "Niantic agrees that it shall manually review a statistically significant percentage of new POI submissions via a Niantic employee or contractor for the principal purpose of trying to avoid POI that are more likely to lead to issues with nuisance or trespass."

  • AScarletSabre-PGOAScarletSabre-PGO Posts: 754 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Niantic employee don't personally review nominations. At least not anymore. There are just too many things be no£mianted.

  • I mean based on the photos you took, I would have rejected it myself. But the second persons picture that shows the whole thing I would have accepted that. A lot of times it's all about the photo you take that can get it rejected instantly. Especially if it looks as if someone is simply trying to get a pokestop at their house.

    I also have experience with having my nominations rejected, however I was brand new at it and had no idea the specifics they might be looking for. I was told in one of my rejections that I was trying to troll people.... Also the biggest issue is the imaging from google earth/street view in the area I am trying to add my nominations , the imaging is from 2008!! That's 13 years ago! A LOT has changed since then. So I'm hoping when I take the hiking trail photo of the actual sign rather than the trail- that they approve it without basing their opinions on google earth view! We also have a koi pond, a gazebo next to the pond, and it's a botanical gardens. We built all of this in higher hopes of educating people on the importance of helping to keep the bees going. ( we have two bee farms nearby)

    We also plan on building a little free library for anyone who visits ( or passes by) and fill it with educational books on native plants, bee facts, coloring sheets for the little ones of bees, butterflies, birds, plants flowers etc. BUT my biggest concern is them just looking at google earth and BOOM instant reject :(

  • Zuddy1-PGOZuddy1-PGO Posts: 12 ✭✭

    calm down bud, I was doing it correctly. I just had a lot of time on my hands.

  • rufoushumming-PGOrufoushumming-PGO Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 2021

    Apols all. I did write a message to you all. It disappeared. Not sure what happened. Poof and magic it disappeared.

    i will respond later I promise

    Post edited by rufoushumming-PGO on
  • oscarc1-INGoscarc1-ING Posts: 366 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Did you do an edit? Sometimes edited posts will disappear until approved by a Niantic mod. Maybe give it a couple of hours and it should re-appear.

Sign In or Register to comment.