Conflicting rejection reasons between email and nomination list
NorthSeaPoet-ING
Posts: 895 ✭✭✭✭✭
I submitter this information board again last month and it didn't enter voting until last week. It got rejected today and well, the rejection reasons are in direct conflict with each other. I was under the impression that Niantic had recently stated that the cultural/historic rating had no bearing on the rejection reasons. So I don't understand why the email says that's the sole reason it was rejected but wayfarer says it doesn't meet criteria and is temporary (it's not, it's been there for about 3 years now).
I will be resubbing it soon. Just want to know why there's conflicting rejection reasons.
Comments
My theory: the code that generates email is sort of an afterthought and that when things change within Wayfarer that code isn't always updated at the same time. The rejection email has always felt slightly off to me, like it was an intern project or something that was done as an afterthought and was never really well-integrated into the rest of Wayfarer.
The email is correct saying you need to improve the photo. For an info sign, the main photo should be read-able (at least partly).
Based on that sign, it looks like you have a subject mismatch - I see "Welcome to the Gypsy Race Park."
Your primary photo would make a great supporting photo.
With a little tweaking, this will be a great wayspot! Thanks for finding it!
I've tried several different photos, titles, etc. My issue isn't the rejections, it's the conflicting rejection reasons. Email says one thing, wayfarer says two other things.
There's nothing wrong with that photo. I'd agree with the title change, but that's no reason to reject either.
Those are all garbage reasons to reject a perfectly fine submission, and I share your pain - I've had slam dunk 5 star submissions (I'm modest) denied for strange reasons (as have a hundred others). It's a shame.
I've tried with just calling it Gypsey Race Park and Welcome to The Gypsey Race Park before, but been rejected or duped (with a sign that has a similar design style but not identical). I think I'm onto attempt 12 or 13 with it at this point - local enough for me to get more photos anyway if needs be but it has had some odd rejection reasons show up on wayfarer for the previous attempts as well.
Examples:
The photo bit is now a bog standard in every rejection, the bit about trying a better photo a d resubmitting I mean, at least, that's what my last few rejections have said when the rejection reasons never list photo as a reason
The cultural/historic one is just bad reviewers in general selecting 1 star in that category. If you've not done one yet, try a photosphere, that might get you away from dupes and uniqueness, unforutently that's all you can do.
For what it's worth, I gave this a positive review when I came across it. I have noticed in the past few weeks though that the quality of Wayfarer reviewing in the UK seems to have literally dropped off a cliff. Previously I've had allotments without a sign accepted, but now I'm struggling to get one accepted that actually has a perfectly good sign, because apparently the sign is temporary despite the allotments having been there for 10 years 🤦♂️
I pretty sure I saw one of these. I can’t remember what I decided but remember not being clear if it was for a completed park (permanent) or if it was one of those boards saying this is what we plan/have started to do (temporary). It was confusing as the graphic at the top of the board looks like an artist’s impression of what it might be like.
Can’t remember what I decided but remember checking out quite a bit about it.
Yeah I've noticed I'm getting a lot more rejects than accepts nowadays. Even get trig stones rejected even when I sell the life out of it. The biggest peeve though is the stupid cultural/historical thing, like at least half my rejections are only that
Trig Markers. On a footpath or publicly accessible open space - fine. In the middle of an arable field with no footpath - PRP.
Agree -- the photo is fine. Although it wouldn't hurt to use a larger photo, although that hasn't worked for you either. Maybe when some people are reading the word "project", they are assuming the project is still under way, meaning the sign will be taken down afterwards? That would sort of fit why you are getting rejections that are temporary. Can you beef up your nomination that the sign is permanent, the park is indeed finished, etc. Maybe having a secondary picture that shows the sign with a good shot of the completed park in the background?
The ‘historical/cultural significant’ rejection is decidedly an erroneous response. There is a specific reviewer feedback that triggers it but right now I cannot recall what it is. The nomination itself looks to me like a short-term construction sign that will come down once the build-out is complete, so I get the temporary rejection, but I also second the feedback that review quality seems to be declining… I just had a small shelter in a park rejected as “location sensitive.”
@X0bai-PGO There's been a fair bit of speculation but I don't think anyone has conclusively proven that any specific behavior causes the historical/cultural rejection reason.
Sorry, can you please show where a footpath is needed to everything. This had a direct walking route to it, it might not be a path, it it is land to walk along
And while there was farming area around it the trig stone was in the public area, I checked a few things before submitting
The main rejection reason though was natural feature
A footpath is not needed "for everything", if your trig point had a direct walking route to it (ie in some publically accessible open space) thats fine, no problem. What I am referring to are those Trig Point submissions I've seen where the Waypoint is slap bang in the middle of a cultivated field - no way to get to it except to walk through the crop, so trespass / crop damage. Those should be rejected for PRP.
Ah right didn't come off that way.
It got approved!!!!! 🥳🥳🥳🥳
Kinda low key annoyed by it though because I appealed it via my Ingress account and subbed it on PoGo, and it just got approved through my PoGo
(My ingress and PoGo are on separate log-ins and support won't let me have them both on the same log-in which is frustrating 🙃🙃🙃🙃)