Invalid Wayspot Appeal for a Fake Duplicate Portal: Cruz lomas de paraíso
Amularia-ING
Posts: 2 ✭✭
Title of the Wayspot: Cruz lomas de paraíso
Location: -12.139715,-76.922326
City: Lima
Country: Perú
Screenshot of the Rejection Email:
Photos to support your claim:
1) FAKE WAYSPOT:
2) REAL WAYSPOT:
Additional information:
*According to the Acceptance Criteria this wayspot should have met all of the following eligibility criteria:*
- Must be a permanent physical, tangible, and identifiable place or object, or object that placemarks an area. (This wayspot mentions a cross in the place; this cross does not exist in this place and the photo was copied from another wayspot where this cross does exist).
- Must be safe and publicly accessible by pedestrians (As can be seen in the photos taken in the area, as well as the satellite views and 360° images, there is no safe access to this area, there are no stairs and there is no trail. This cross does not exist.)
- Must contain accurate information in the title, description, and photo (Photo is copied from another wayspot: Cruz de Candelaria -12.126701,-76.928825).
- Must meet at least one of the three eligibility criteria
(This wayspot does not meet any of the acceptance criteria. Unfortunately, there was an abuse of the system that clearly sought to benefit a group of players, even without regard to the risk of interacting with this fake wayspot).
More than one request has been made to remove this fake portal, with no success. Is there anything that we may not be including as evidence that does not meet what you expect?
*According to the rejection criteria — "Nominations and edit submissions may be entirely rejected if it meets at least one of the following rejection criteria:"*
The aforementioned portal:
Exhibit 1: Does not meet eligibility criteria
It is not a great place of exploration, place for exercise, or place to be social. The object is generic and not visually unique or interesting".
Exhibit 2: Does have an ineligible location, place, or object
Location is unsafe, without pedestrian access.
On the other hand, the stairs and the pathway are identified in the original wayspotl:
Exhibit 3: Abusive location
Exhibit 4: Does have an ineligible photo
It is obviously doctored
Photo of fake wayspot:
Photo of real wayspot:
Exhibit 5: It is a Fake nomination
This is an obviously fake nomination due to a copied photo from another portal.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I apologize for this long text, but I think there is enough evidence to show that the wayspot has been, maliciously, declared and not rejected as a duplicate. I hope I've demonstrated that it does not meet the requirements to remain as a wayspot.
I would appreciate if you could take the time to carefully review the evidence shown and the risk that implies that a false wayspot that puts at risk the lives of the people who interact with it, should not continue to exist.
Comments
Thanks for reporting, @Amularia-ING! We have reviewed the report and taken action on the Wayspot and the Wayfinder in accordance with our policies. While we are unable to discuss our actions in detail to protect the submitter’s privacy, they may include, but are not limited to, sending a warning message, placing restrictions on their Wayfarer, Pokémon GO, or Ingress account, putting their account on probation, or placing a temporary or permanent suspension on their Wayfarer, Pokémon GO or Ingress account.
Thanks for helping us maintain the quality of the Wayspots.