Playground and cultural center are not eligible anymore?
MonsieurMiaw-PGO Posts: 14 ✭✭
Hello! I was wondering if playground and community center were still eligible? I got one of both reject twice and was wondering if I need to change my way of voting
Hello! Both playgrounds and cultural centers would typically be eligible. It's a bit hard to tell since I can't see your entire nomination, but I think both of your submissions have likely been rejected because there are already similar existing, approved Wayspots at these locations.
Your submission for the sign for the cultural center is at roughly the same location as an existing Wayspot for "La Danse de la Diversite" which I assume is another name for the same center.
The giraffe at the playground, similarly, is a part of the existing Wayspot for the playground as a whole called "Park Andre-Dansereau - Aire de jeux".
In both cases, I suspect you've gotten the "other" rejection because the pieces you've submitted aren't separately distinct or important enough to be eligible separate from the already existing Wayspots.
Why on earth are their 11 disagrees with the above comment? It's very standard and not controversial. I don't even think the great UK trail markers debate generated that many dislikes on a single post. For people (alts? bots? cabals?) smashing disagree, you do realize that forum opinions don't affect the rating of your submissions, right?
I never mind when others dislike my opinions. In this case, however, I think it's funny because I actually haven't given any personal opinions. I only tried to explain a possible reason why reviewers might have rejected what most of us would otherwise consider eligible points of interest.
Personally, I would certainly have marked the nomination for the playground as a duplicate of the existing playground Wayspot. I have no idea whatsoever how I would have rated the L'Escale nomination. The sign is interesting and artistic enough that I may have considered it as mural-like artwork. Or, if there were clearly two separate points of interest within the same building - like a cultural center with a theatre inside - I might have approved it as well. As it is, I don't have enough information to tell.
Definitely. There's certainly no problem with a person disagreeing maybe because they think playground equipment should be multiple wayspots or whatever, but 11 disagreements on such a topic seems unnatural. Especially over such a short amount of time. I'm pretty sure even if someone posted "Niantic is dumb, I will never accept trail markers" it would at least take them several days to accumulate that many disagrees.
"Why on earth are their 11 disagrees with the above comment?" Because we're 11 people who disagree. MonsieurMiaw is well-known in our community and showed us this thread in a local chat to make sure he wasn't just salty over nothing. His two nominations are excellent in our opinion so it's not crazy that we disagree. Btw disagreeing =/= saying @Purptacular-PGO is wrong, for all we know he has it. But to us those are quality, unique (and most importantly, valid) nominations.
"you do realize that forum opinions don't affect the rating of your submissions, right?" Yes
Now my question is why do you care ? Isn't the goal of a forum to hear other people's voices lol
Thanks for sharing your voice @BeyondSour-ING
I will just reiterate that playground spaces are generally eligible, but each individual piece of playground equipment in the space is typically not. This is not my particular opinion, just an attempt to make you and your community aware of how reviewers vote.
I've looked at the playground on Google Streetview. It contains a large play structure with climbing apparatus, two sets of bars, and two slides, as well as a set of swings and three different bouncy ride-on objects.
The playground as a whole is an existing Wayspot. Your community may well feel that the playground contains multiple pieces of equipment of importance, but reviewers simply won't approve each slide and swing set and bouncy ride as separate Wayspots, especially when they are all located within such a small area.
Yeah we got that, but those are two separate playgrounds for two different age groups, which typically gets accepted (I had this exact scenario accepted via appeal 3 days ago actually). The giraffe is the "anchor" he uses to nominate the younger children playground and, obviously we agree on this, he won't submit every single object in both playground. We still strongly believe there are two playgrounds in that park.
And the community centre is completely different from the already existing POI (which is a mural from a local artist iirc). They both are different things with different purposes
Anyways, I don't find the wayfarer forums pertinent so I'll disappear for now, I was just trying to clear up the bots accusations which was wild to me. Have a great day :)
Thanks for adding a reply so there could be an actual discussion. Btw, "bots" was a joke and I'm sorry if it was seen as an accusation.
OP answer doesnt want to post. Probably because of the picture he add as supporting info.
« « La danse de la diversité » is an art piece locate on the center.(picture from the POI show the name and the artiste signature in the bottom right). The fact that an art piece is situated on a building doesnt make the building it self unelligible. »
« The playground with the girafe is clearly visible as a different play structure from the one existing. The two are having different space clearly delimited . The POI was located right on the girafe. A parc can have multiple playground and they can be all different POI as long as they are different and not in the same space »
Oh and he told us that playground got accepted on the 3rd try during the night. I guess that the reviewer as the community realised that two separated playground can be two POI 🤷♂️ Its still sad that it have to take 3 try to pass a playground! I guess more people should take the time to look at the map and the criteria clarification
I looked at the map I would count then as one
I guess its your opinion and the reviewer doesnt agree with you. Two separated and delimited sand square one with the big play structure that is the existing POI and one with swing set and animals theme play structure. For me as a reviewer it is two different structure. I would love to hear your definition of « different »
If it cane up for review I'd mark as duplicate it most likely wouldn't matter though if I had my mates voting on it for me
Just because your group coordinated to block approve it as a Wayspot doesn't mean it isn't a duplicate of the existing playground Wayspot.
Just because a group coordinated to block décline it as a Wayspot doesn't mean it is a duplicate of the existing playground Wayspot. There is two separate space with différent structure. It usualy take more negative than positive feedback for voting so saying it was approuve because of that is a bit rough. Reviewer approuved it. Maybe you should take a closer look as they did
Out of curiosity I had a look at this.
In my view the 2 areas are distinct. There are no fences anywhere in the park but there is any area of grass - not huge but it keeps them separate. The area with the giraffe, from looking at equipment is designed to be for younger children and the other for older. Where I live I would expect separate fencing but that is not style here.
I can also see because of the lack of fencing why someone would consider both play areas to be one. I would always consider a distinct play area with equipment to be a distinct feature.
« La danse de la diversité » is an art piece locate on the center.(picture from the POI show the name and the artiste signature in the bottom right). The fact that an art piece is situated on a building doesnt make the building it self unelligible.
The playground with the girafe is clearly visible as a different play structure from the one existing. The two are having different space clearly delimited . The POI was located right on the girafe. A parc can have multiple playground and they can be all different POI as long as they are different and not in the same space
still wondering what is your définition of same and different space. Because I clearly see two different playground in this picture
I can see two separate areas too. I don't think literally being able to step from one to the other is enough to make them distinct
I think recently Giffard said that of they are clearly distinct, then they could be put in as seperate, though u think he was talking g about fenced off ones that had a path between them, im sure someone can find and link the discussion
The two space are clearly separated. The two space include equipement that is clearly different and targeting a different public. The two space are usine a différent thématique. Oh and I would like to be able to see someone being able to take a 10+ foot step
They can be separate play structures and still be the same playground. The local children certainly wouldn’t differentiate just because there’s a line of lawn between them. I would also reject as a duplicate.
A playground isn't limited to that has the safety mulch or gavel. It is the area the a child will realistically run around in. And I am seen children run back and forth between these two play structures.
They differentiate them because one is a giant play structure and one is a small animals theme structure. The lawn is only clearly separating them
I would vote them separate. As @Gazzas89-PGO mentioned, there was a recent comment by Giffard that a path separating two sets of playground equipment counted as two wayspots.
Here's the post with an extensive list of clarifications:
Either way, they were accepted on the third try, whether brute force voting or not, enjoy your playground(s).
I'm still amused that 11 people were salty enough to dislike a post 11 times...
My brother, if it’s true that realistically some older kids would go back and forth between the older and younger kids playground, I can assure you that if I brought a younger child to play safely with the small giraffe swing and older kids tormented them I’d realistically ask them to go back to their assigned playground. It’s about intent, that park is designed with two playgrounds for two age groups. Some families go to the park ONLY for the giraffe playground and vice versa.
ITT elitist wayfarer forum users who are shocked to learn the vast majority of reviewers don’t care about the forums and discuss wayfarer with people from their community. Nobody disliked anything, what purp said was simply factually not true. He compared a mural to a community centre, which, to be fair, I understand because of the language barrier. Is it crazy to disagree with that though?
and lol at the brute force we’re not nearly enough to pass stuff that’s not valid. The playground passed because it meets Niantic’s vision of an eligible POI, whether you agree or not.