Reviewers rejecting eligible nominations repeatedly...
NorfosAlus-PGO
Posts: 136 ✭✭✭
and this is what it looks like for reviewers :
hopefully once appeals start working eligible nominations will finally see acceptances :)
NorfosAlus-PGO
Posts: 136 ✭✭✭
and this is what it looks like for reviewers :
hopefully once appeals start working eligible nominations will finally see acceptances :)
Comments
I would at least 3* for location, it seems to be there because of the red building.
from the satellite view you can see the sandless sandbox aka, the rock shape of it.... i don't see why would reviewers reject this nomination over and over i thought playgrounds are eligible?..
Without a photo sphere and/or a strong support photo, you will continue to have trouble getting this approved.
There are already two very similar swings nearby.
https://intel.ingress.com/?pll=55.676522,21.170978
https://intel.ingress.com/?pll=55.676919,21.170716
And the old looking swings and sandbox can't be seen properly from either satellite view or street view.
Note. With even a quick glance I noticed other red coloured house ends, so it doesn't "prove" the location.
Note 2. Not saying I would have rejected this, just giving a different perspective.
i know there are 2 others nearby because i made them, accepted on the first try with the same ammount of location evidence as this one... so what's the problem?
When there are several similar POIs nearby and the location isn't clear -> reviewers tend to become more careful/cynical/paranoid/suspicious.
In other words those earlier acceptances make the later nomination more challenging.
Is there a way to take a better supporting photo that makes it easier for reviewers to see the submission in context?
First of all it's not a waypoint for my home, i just explored that neighbourhood last summer and took pics to nominate stuff.. i won't go out there to get another supporting photo just because reviewers are acting paranoid
I'm sorry, but if the reviewers have rejected the nomination three times and you refuse to move and want to keep on using the same photo that you took, then I don't think that you can complain too much if you don't do anything to improve your nomination.
One day it might get accepted, but if you want better results you should try to improve your nomination.
yea ? on what basis? the reasons i get provided for the rejection?
There is nothing to improve, this is a playground.
Where are you taking your supporting photo from? And what does it look like?
First I would move right about 5 to 10m show more of the swings, still get the building in the background but more swings.
I would then take my supporting photo about half way up that path leading to the street view location. That would re enforce that location accuracy.
Seems like reviewers just aren't seeing it. I definitely wouldn't have rejected out right, but from what I can see I may have dropped location to 3 stars.
Good luck on the next try. I should be accepted.
Yes, at least twice we can see that it has been rejected because they haven't been able to verify that it's the right location.
You can try to help the reviewers verify that this is the correct place or you can try to insult and argue with everyone else, but you should be aware that that's something that won't get your nomination approved because the reviewers won't see anything that you write here and even then it might turn them off about approving a nomination from someone that refuses to even take a second photo to help them and prefers to insult other people.
The key problem seems to be that reviewers don't seem to be able to confirm the location of your nomination, hence the "inaccurate / mismatched location. You need a much better supporting photo and / or a photosphere to help confirm the location.
@NorfosAlus-PGO If three different sets of reviewers have rejected the exact same candidate then perhaps the reviewers aren't the problem? You've been given good feedback about why it was rejected, and now you have two choices. You can keep blaming reviewers because they didn't accept a poorly-presented candidate, or you can learn from the feedback you've been given.
You get to pick which of those paths to follow, but one of them seems far more rational to me than the other.
If you don't think that improving the supporting photo and/or supporting info when the feedback from the rejection reasons is that the reviewers can't verify the location, then you can't keep on blaming Niantic for the many problems that this system has.
I just noticed something about your submission that you submitted on January 27th of this year if you are appealing that that means it was already rejected less than three days after it was submitted. Likely Niantic actually grabbed this submission and reviewed it themselves since it appears that the other two took two to three months to get a decision. The other clue would be that there is no rejection reasons up in the upper left-hand corner. This is typically a sign that Niantic was the one that did the review of that particular nomination.
nope, submissions in my area can get thru voting as fast as 4 hours :) Haven't gotten a Niantic grabbed submission in months even tho i submit a lot
We have hardcore players in my neighborhood who DEFINITELY use the reviewing system "politically"... They know where their enemies live and will automatically reject any submission in that area. The other team does not play as hard and doesn't even know about the wayfaring review system, they keep submitting great portals that are always rejected.
i don't think that is the problem in my case, it just feels like whenever u get anything rejected once people will reject it again due to the toxic "free agreement" mentallity
Just to let you know: Not all the reviewers have time to cross-compare the buildings near subject,
besides, the swing near the road, had make reviewers think you may fake the location.
If i were you, who is too lazy to photo supporting image, try this:
Warm regards from Taiwan :)
Interesting to see how passionate some reviewers are 😉 I work according to "in dubio pro reo" which in this case means, if i cannot be 100% certain that the suggestion does NOT exist then I approve it.
We all know that especially Google satellite pictures are not always up-to-date. Way too often not up-to-date...
Let me see if I will get this as a suggestion for aproval - you have my voice. Already the pictures above are enough evidence for me to approve 👍️ (Btw, I'm approving stuff since the early days where this was only possible in Ingress...).
I hate these discussions about "ah, there's a flower on the lawn that does not appear on the satellite photo - that MUST be a fake location" - guys, a new way spot is an advantage for ALL Niantic games. Just in case some of you have forgotten why we do this...
Especially some of my favoured Ingress colleagues who still think they're something better than PG players. I'm playing Ingress since nearly the beginning and am one of these who think we're all ONE community.
And, yes, I'm also aware of these "enemy groups" who battle each other, also by rejecting each other's legible submissions. Ridiculous b**lsh*t, sorry. You just hurt each other with this.
Well, a good supporting photo showing the POI and some helpful landmarks goes a long way to getting the location at least to a 3* "likely to be there" level, but a lot of players don't seem to understand this and seem to think it's a way just of showing "safe pedestrian access". Hands up who has seen a picture of some pavement with no indication of the POI location during todays reviewing?
exactly , i'm surprised how many negative reviewers exposed themselves on this thread... Literally looking for reasons to reject rather than accept
You can literally see the old sandbox that's on the main photo from satellite, if you can't add 2+2 maybe you shouldn't review :)
@sogNinjaman-ING If I could tell every single submitter just one thing it would be exactly that... show the thing you're submitting in the larger context so you can help reviewers find/understand the candidate. For 99% of stuff you don't need to show safe pedestrian access because it's implicit, but even if you do a wide view of the area with the candidate in it will get you exactly that.
You misunderstand. People, or at least me, am/are telling you why your nomination is not as good as you think. That's not the same as "looking for reasons to reject it". :)
You keep telling that the sandbox can be seen in satellite view, could you please point thar from it?
And no, I wouldn't have personally voted 1* for location.
My comment was directed at the photos presented as part of the OP, the supporting photo going with the first 3 nomination pictures is of no use at all. Looking at your other pair of "red / blue" photos, I'd have to say I can't actually see a "sandbox" in either of your photos, just a set of swings and a concrete bunker. There is nothing in the two photos that I can confidently match together location wise.
You asked for some help with this nomination. It really should go through, but only if you actually provide the photos that help the the reviewers.
4 😉
@NorfosAlus-PGO writes:
exactly , i'm surprised how many negative reviewers exposed themselves on this thread... Literally looking for reasons to reject rather than accept
Not one person in this discussion has said that they would reject it. Several people have provided constructive feedback to you explaining why it is difficult to review and showing you ways that you can improve the submission to make it easier to accept. You seem to be very stuck on blaming reviewers even though reviewers with a lot of experience have given you some excellent feedback about how to improve submissions like this.
There are two important components to submitting a good wayspot candidate. The first is obviously to find a good candidate. The second is to present your candidate well so that it is easy for reviewers to understand and accept the submission. You have succeeded in finding an eligible candidate. Based on multiple rejections of the same submission it seems like you have not presented it well enough for reviewers to understand and accept it.
You're insisting that the submission can't be improved even though several people have patiently explained to you exactly how to do exactly that. I get the impression that you're just here to complain, and not to learn, and that makes me sad. It means several people have wasted their time trying to help you.
If you have time to argue and deny constructive criticism, better use it to improve this nomination.
Your main photo is pretty good in highlighting playground and the red building behind, try @EONloveu-PGO 's tips for supporting photo so reviewers can quickly notice the same building. Then emphasize that in your additional information.
Good luck.
i never asked for help to make this better nomination, i reported so community can share same absurd experiences they have.