Why?
Martmitemon-PGO
Posts: 5 ✭✭
This was rejected for the following reason:
The real-world location of the nomination appears to have explicit or inappropriate activity, Insufficient evidence that the nomination accurately reflects the submitted real-world location based on comparison of the submitted photo and map views, Photo of the nomination appears to be of a body part instead of a valid object.
Why are these people allowed to review.
Comments
You still must make a case that the nomination is acceptable. Without knowing the details of the nomination, it is impossible for anyone else to determine if such a case was made. Second, I can see many reviewers rejecting this as mass-produced, generic, or not visually unique or interesting which is the first rejection condition.
Complete submission
North Somerset Tidal Trail Marker
Portishead England
NOT ACCEPTED
2021-09-08
Description
Trail marker for popular coastal walk
Location
48 Pier Rd, Portishead, Bristol BS20 7EA, UK
Supplemental Information
Ideal place for a pokestop on a popular walking route (note this is a very quiet T junction used frequently by ramblers)
The “explicit activity” rejection is a well-documented flaw that Niantic created: the rejection reason the reviewer is choosing is “location inappropriate” and some think that just means that your subject does not meet criteria, while the reviewer feedback makes it sounds like there’s all manner of activity that would get starred out if described in this forum. I believe those reviewers take a look at this and think it’s a regular street sign and reach for the most convenient - albeit incorrect - rejection reason.
I don’t know what your pin location was, or what the Google view of this location looks like; it sounds as if you may have an issue on that front. A photosphere might serve you well here.
‘Body part’ is obviously incorrect and is most probably explained as a misclick.
Not found in the rejection reasons: calling it “popular” with no support for that statement. Don’t do that, it sounds like begging, especially when you then contradict that idea by saying it’s a quiet corner. A trail marker does not have to be popular to be eligible… in fact, an *unpopular* area would be a great place to explore.
Change your description to say something like "trail marker on the north Summerseat tidal trail, which goes from "x" to "y" passing through (insert town names here)". Then in the supporting info, make sure to mention tjat it encourages exercise and exploration and add in a link for the website of the coastal path or at least a link to a map (most trails have these). And finally, as someone else stated, put a photosphere down
Probably still won't pass as reviewers think, bizarrely, that metal signs like these don't count as trail markers despite niantic saying otherwise several times, but it will give it the best chance
All the advice that @gazzas89-PGO gives is needed as you need a much better description for a trail marker.
However I don’t think this will pass on the basis of safe pedestrian access. I know exactly what you mean by quiet roads and these routes do have sections that use small country roads where the normally situation is people walk along them too. But this doesn’t sit with the strict need for a decent area for pedestrians to be which is not on the road itself.
It's a valid trail marker. Howerver, with no pavement there it should be rejected for "no predestrian access"
It might be useful to link to the local government website regarding the trail:
Thanks for all the comments. Really useful advice. I do not think ‘does not meet criteria’ should be an acceptable reason. When I’m reviewing I always write a comment as to the reason even. But I do think the advice above is really helpful.
Nobody but Niantic ever sees anything typed in those boxes, any comments you type are never passed onto the submitter.
If there is nowhere safe to walk near this trail marker, where do you think the people walking this trail are walking?
Along the roads, just like I do while working in areas like this. Howver, from a Niatic Criteria point of view - this is what they say:
"Use for nominations that do not have a safe, pedestrian pathway leading to the object. Note that it is not sufficient to be able to access the nomination from a nearby sidewalk. There must be a pedestrian walkway or a trail leading all the way to the object. "
Sensible? Well I'm sure they are perfectly sensible to the Niantic legal department, so they can point to statements like this if someone gets themsleves run over while visiting a Waypoint such as the one above. I'm going by my reading of this and the rejection criteria and following criteria as best I can.
I find trail markers less hit and miss if I accentuate the locality as much as the marker.
Title
Tidal Trail - Along the x,y. Past the x, y. by the castle, mansion etc etc
Description
Marker on section x of the NS coastal trail.
Maybe use the support to tell people the length of the trail, where it starts and finishes, links etc
I'd try get as little of the metal pole in the first pic too. I do think first impressions count a lot for many reviewers and you are off to a bad start quickly if the impression is negative.
Good luck.
I'm not sure the support pic helps much either as it looks like there is not much pedestrian access.
Except the road surrounding it is the trail itself, as this is a crossroad in between 2 trails. You can literally walk up to this sign using the trails this marker marks.
If you're going to claim that this trail is not safe since cars can also possibly drive on it, then not only is this a ridiculous argument(i.e. "A marked designated trail for hiking is not safe for pedestrians"), but also you might as well rule out any pedestrian road which is wide enough to fit a car since a car might drive on that as well.
That is not a safe POI as per Niantics definition of safe pedestrian access.
They have very strict rules regarding whats safe, probably to stop them being sued, and standing in a road doesnt meet the criteria
All of that black stuff is pavement at the intersection of two walking trails. Nobody has specified legal or illegal composition for pedestrian walkways. They can be any combination of natural, man-made, or composite materials, or just earth or sod.
The blackstuff is tarmac road, with junction dashes on it, its not a path
@Eneeoh-PGO Heres a street view link to where the POI should be, you can't see the sign due to the out of date SV but you can match up the telegraph poles, and the nearby fence.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/gkmnht1pnehseRYK8
As you can see the POI is located at the corner of a road where as the path for safe pedestrian access is on the otherside of the road.