Trail markers rejected
derwaelBE-PGO
Posts: 9 ✭✭
It’s the second time that these trail markers are rejected while there is an official page of this bike routes through Belgium (search on google). The same trail marker on another place in our city is already approved, so why is this one rejected all the time? Trail markers are 5 star nominations… Today, it has been rejected for ‘inappropriate activity’ …
Comments
Mentioning that “trail markers are 5 star nominations” in your supporting information is influencing reviewers on what to vote, which is something you’re not allowed to do.
Include some links to the trail to confirm it is a named trail instead. Try and resubmit. Some trails take some a few attempts. Also, don’t take existing POI, as examples of what should be approved now.
Okay, thanks for the information. I do have my doubts about the reason why it has been rejected.
Personally I wouldn't accept them, iirc cycle trails aren't acceptable for pedestrian access reasons. Then again, it mught be dependent on where you are, the general consensus in the UK is to reject cycle trails
Bike trails meet criteria and can be accepted... Certain bike trail locations do not have pedestrian access and can be rejected for that reason ( not the case on the example above)
Some bike trail markers in U.K. are on small roads with no pavement - so not suitable. But many are off road or do have pedestrian access and are absolutely fine as as they are used as walking routes too. So should be approved.
I mean, biking trails are cited as specifically eligible under Great Places for Exercise in the Eligibility Criteria. How does one get from there to blanket rejection?
Those signs look mass produced. The "inappropriate" reason is probably because they think you're trying to pass a common sidewalk as a trail. (I'm only here to give you an idea what others were thinking, not to argue if they're right or wrong.)
Why wouldn't they be mass produced? They signal a trail, so it's important that they are coherent and similar/identical. I'll never understand this mentality. We have an extensive route of Trail Markers here, and the only thing that distinguishes them is the colour stripes (for different trails), and a number. Apart from that, they're all identical, as they should be.
This is a common ‘wetware’ problem with the Wayfarer system, with wetware being the part of the program that utilizes the human mind.
Some nominations are of objects. The objects must be properly displayed in photos and in context, and must seem significant and/or visually interesting.
Other nominations are instead locations. Wayfarers are guided to try to pin their locations to proxy objects, but in these cases the objects are not the nomination. They are often plain, utilitarian, and uninteresting-looking.
The location itself can be multi-dimensional. It affords an experience: go to the Audubon Society Reserve and you may hear a woodpecker, that cafe has live music, there’s a trail to a scenic lookout.
It seems like a common human failing even within this forum to treat properly formatted location nominations as failed *object nominations*.