It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In with Ingress Sign In with Pokémon GO
Where is the marker?
Those are just generic cycle route signs. If there was a distinct thing on the signs, such as a trail name or logo, that indicates a trail it might be acceptable. That is, a marker has to actually mark a trail for it to be a trail marker.
When talking about small trail markers, you might see something like a small coloured arrow on a wooden post. If that’s designated as indicating a specific trail then it counts as a trail marker.
See this for example:
(Although note that I don’t know whether I would accept this per my previous comments on NCN named routes.)
what's wrong with it? its on street view. its an official trail. You didn't like the NCN ones and now you don't like the ones that aren't NCN? come on make your mind up.
I have walked most of the Surrey Hills submitting hundreds of trail markers and other gems but most get rejected and the likelihood of other players visiting and submitting is slim. They are more likely to visit if there is a portal/stop there though.
Subbed a well hidden memorial bench for some local famous authors who wrote books about various walks in the area but it got rejected, I doubt anyone else will find that. But this is another bug bear of mine where it's not just bad reviewers rejecting things, im sure there is some kind of abuse going on that causes more rejections rather than just other thinking reviewers like we see on these forums/threads.
It's nowhere near a cemetery/any sensitive area and it does meet acceptence criteria but rejection reasons are nonsense 95% of the time. I don't even see trail marker rejecters rejecting this but it happens
This sign is on this trail it was included in the supporting information.
Yeah, but there appears to be nothing in that picture that tells a cyclist how to continue on the trail. The sign maybe located on the trail, but it appears to be unrelated to the trail. There needs to be some indicator on the sign that helps people advance on the trail, like a trail name, trail number, or pictogram.
It’s a sign that leads you down that part of the trail. Name numbers picture is irrelevant. I’ve provided information on the trail in supporting information to give people who aren’t local the information they need. The sign is just an anchor on the trail.
I still see some confusion in the air.
Let me add to what I've already said, by the term "Generic signs" means regular mass-produced signs. Trail signs will be on the trail/hiking area or they may contain trail names with the direction sign or with trail numbers
From RobWaudby's examples made on 11th September, "Acceptable" and "not sure on these" are correct to be acceptable.
I hope it gives a clearer view now.
Thanks for the additional information @NianticGiffard. so my post a few up to this one would that be acceptable as it’s on a trail hiking area? It doesn’t have the trail name on it or a number but it leads up and down the trail. I provided a link to the official trail in my submission.
again thanks for responding on this very active thread.
Could this all be cleared up in the Next AMA if there is a next AMA. I’m sure this post will be very active again now.
Your one you submitted doesn't have a trail name or ncn number on it, all your ones you posted that are acceptable either have a trail name, an ncn number, or are on the wooden trail markers, so I would say by what Giffard has now clarified, defo not allowed, but if he comes back and corrects it then it woukd be fine
Please rethink. You are about to authorise 500,000 generic and mass produced signed that have a number on, that represent a route through traffic and mostly via roads.
They aren’t something for Niantic players to be getting exercise exploring, they aren’t safe for walkers, and cyclists will only benefit if using third-party hard/software to interact with wayspots automatically, otherwise they are at liberty of being hit by traffic.
The examples that were listed even include a NCN marker as not eligible, so you’ve simultaneously said yes and no to these. These are absolutely everywhere, most without safe access (by wayfarer criteria) for being in the road, and do not represent a named trail.
You have been woefully misinformed by someone who clearly just wants more things in the network, not anything of value nor significance.
He said trail signs will be on the trail/hiking area or the MAY contain an name or number with directional arrows.
so mine is on a trail it contains arrows to lead you up and down the trail to different destinations. Granted it doesn’t have a name on the sign or even a number but I have provided a link to the official trail.
Technically the ncn marker that was listed as not acceptbale doesn't actually says national cycle network on it, just the number, that would be the difference I guess
That’s why i included them in the not valid pile.
Most of these NCN signs are along cycle routes that aren’t busy to traffic when they have to go along a road. NCN try to make it as safe as possible and are even remarking some routes to be safer.
all of these routes are safe for pedestrians and cyclists.
I'm telling you the difference, the one you have is a general direction sign, it doesn't mention any trail, it doesn't show any trail, it says all these places can be walked or cycled to. Go back and look at what was on your list for acceptable, every one of them had either the number and said ncn or they were part of dedicated trails. That sign you have submitted is neither of these, it is on a path, it is just directional signs to certain places. You need to understand the distinction, because just now you have opened up a good amount of waypoints, but if you push it you will get them all shut down again
I know what’s on my list I made it. I agree my sign isn’t on the list. But as @NianticGiffard just cleared up it MAY or MAYNOT have a name or number on it. It is on a trail or path that is an official trail. I’m using the sign as an anchor to that trail as it has nothing else to anchor it to. unless i use a random tree which would be rejected as well.
I know I’ve just opened a massive amount of waypoints and I don’t expect everyone to like the idea of having new waypoints to visit but these all actively promote Niantic’s vision of what a waypoint is.
It is not a trail marker, it is a general direction sign. Again, you need to learn the difference or you will ruin it for everyone, this one does not encourage exploration or exercise, it is the equivalent to the distance signs you find on the motorway.
While Giffard said it may or may not contain the name, all your examples at least had a number on the sign, this doesn't, it is quite literally a general direction sign, nothing about a trial on it, nor does it have anything g to do with a trail, it just happens to be on "a trail" but is clearly a bog standard direction sign
I’m going to leave this debate there. Not going to keep backwards and forwards with you.
we can agree to disagree.
On this one, you are in the wrong, you are trying to claim that because a general direction sign happens to be on a "trail" it makes it a trail marker, if I was to pick up that sign and put it on a road somewhere, would you calk it a trail marker then? No, of course you wouldn't, but, if it had the trail name or ncn number or anything on the sign to distinctively mark it as a trail marker, then it wouldn't matter where it was plopped down, it would still be a trail marker (though by Giffords clarification, it would fail of on a road, but thats irrelevant to the point)
I am Happy that Most of the people that are showing their hardness and Colourful ideas on how to reject eligible candidates are based in the US or UK and will never review Here in my area.
My hope is that this kind of one
And this Kind of one
Are OK, they have the number and say ncn on it
This is the referenced post for easy access.
Just quoting this so we don't need to go find it again lol. Giffard has said the acceptable and the not sure are OK now
I was under the impression the NCN used minor roads, alongside shared paths, disused railways, canal town paths, and traffic claimed routes (in towns/cities) to ensure safety?
I definitely don't agree with all the markers suddenly being eligible as wayspots though. I'd prefer it if the ones that are accepted are the ones that are part of genuine cycling trails such as the Way of the Roses.
Be interesting to see what happens now going forward.
NCN do try and use minor roads, but most (at least locally) are along shared paths, old railways, etc etc for the safety reason you have said about.
@NianticGiffard the National Cycle Network is akin to a highway network, and large parts of it includes highways. Please see the Ordnance Survey NCN map layer or the OpenStreetMap cycle map layer (national routes are red, with numbers) to get an idea of the extent and coverage of the network.
The majority of signs people are posting are not marking a trail, they are sign posting a route on this network or a local (un-designated) route.
Let me add to what I've already said, by the term "Generic signs" means regular mass-produced signs.
The blue NCN signs are generic, mass‐produced, signs used across the whole network. Sustrans have criteria for Signing and Wayfinding that even says that the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 (TSRGD) must be followed for routes on public highways and, while not required for most traffic-free routes (since TSRGD does not apply), that designers should consider using the standard scheme.
I posit therefore that the NCN signs are by definition generic — they not unique to any route on the network, and they are not unique to a given area.
I also suggest that an NCN route is generic — it’s just a collection of existing ways. NCN routes are not unique to any given area, they are found all across the UK.
Trail signs will be on the trail/hiking area or they may contain trail names with the direction sign or with trail numbers
The NCN sign mark routes on the National Cycle Network; they do not generally mark specific trails, although some signs may incorporate trail markers. The routes have sections both on or adjacent to public highways and off (referred to as “traffic‐free” routes by Sustrans, the organisation that maintains the NCN).
So, I’m putting forward again that NCN routes themselves are not trails (in the sense we want for exploration), but they may incorporate trails. It follows that NCN route numbers should not be considered trail markers.
The only time NCN signs should be considered as trail markers is when they have something on the sign that indicates a trail, such as a trail name or logo.
I still feel you are missing the point. Forget about generic please. The blue part of the NCN sign is generic I would agree but the information given on the sigh is different on each sign.
Routes, Trails, Cycleways, all these things promote Exploration, Exercise, Socialising. They are 90% off of main roads with most being along paths that are safe for pedestrians and cyclists.
The blue part of the NCN sign is generic I would agree but the information given on the sigh is different on each sign.
The blue part of a streetname sign is generic, but the information given on the sign is different on each sign (name of the street and often also name of the city) which makes them unique as well ? ;-)
FYI When I bring the kids to school by car I come accross more so called "trailmarkers" then streetname signs
@NianticDanbocat there needs to be a Stop to this discussion.