People need to be kicked off here
JaVonSafford-PGO
Posts: 10 ✭✭
I swear people need to be kicked off of this, if they are going to reject obvious pokestops. Nobody's reading anything, Nobody's checking anything. They are just flying through the nominations.
I submit a fountain in a really big lake, I put the pokestop on land but not far away at all from what's actually being nominated. REJECTED, because mismatched location. WELL DUH, the stop needs to be on land right. Do you really expect people to walk out in the middle of a lake to spin a pokestop??? (Fountain is only about 200ft out.)
Also, I submit the US flag on a flag pole. Took the photo clear as day on a $1200 phone. REJECTED, Low quality photo. What?????? The size of some people's brain....is shocking.
Comments
The rejection of the fountain is correct. If you can't walk to something and touch it then it does not have safe pedestrian access. The pin must be ON the thing you submit, not nearby.
Flag poles do not qualify.
There's hundreds of thousands of fountains in the game already and flag poles.
Flagpoles don't usually qualify. This subject has come up before on the forum.
As per Hosette's comments, a fountain in the middle of a lake would not qualify, especially if it is 200 feet away from land. Has to have pedestrian access. Other fountains in game that have been approved would have pedestrian access.
Unfortunately, while it might seem strange, we cannot use what is already in Niantic games as a baseline for what is currently acceptable today. Some Wayspots are grandfathered in so much as while they might not meet the acceptance criteria in 2022, they also don't meet the removal criteria (or simply haven't been reported).
When we review, we have to do so with both the acceptance criteria: https://niantic.helpshift.com/hc/en/21-wayfarer/faq/2771-acceptance-criteria/ and the rejection criteria: https://niantic.helpshift.com/hc/en/21-wayfarer/faq/2774-rejection-criteria/ in mind.
As Hosette has already said, an agitating/aerating fountain in the middle of a lake cannot be walked up to and interacted with, and we should not pick some random place away from it to act as a proxy.
Flag poles are generally considered to be mass produced, so without an interesting story or something else that makes the flag pole exploration, exercise or socialisation worthy, it's also not a stand-out nomination.
I do agree, though, that random rejection reasons are especially frustrating and do not help when you're trying to work out why the community hasn't accepted your nominations. I'm sure that the majority of submitters have had similar issues (I had a plaque rejected as a face just the other day) and a fix is well overdue.
it is rather shocking that you have not read the criteria.
The criteria is actually very vague, just about anything can be a pokestop. Sorry im a very technical person.
But the Criteria does say "Water features", which is commonly referred to as decorative fountains. Also "water features" by definition is very broad and also includes fountains in lakes or ponds, waferfalls, streams, ect.
Another example would be, in the first sentence of the second part of the criteria says "A place you'd go to get some fresh air". That could literally be anything. That could be a bench(which I've seen several) even though benches are mass produced objects, they are in fact a place you'd go to get fresh air(especially if they are bolted to the ground making them permanent objects). However, the same can't be said for something like, a light pole.
Since the criteria is not specific, it leaves grounds for users to interpret what is acceptable as a pokestop.
Oh trust me, I've read it. You might want to read my previous comment
what makes the flag and flagpole unique? could it be considered a non-permanent feature, as flags are moved around in mast positions, different flags etc @JaVonSafford-PGO
@JaVonSafford-PGO Consider both the acceptance criteria and the rejection criteria. Water features are generally acceptable, but one that doesn't have safe pedestrian access crashes and burns on a hard rejection reason.
I'm sure you've read the criteria but if you refresh your memory by reading this document and you will see this:
Ineligible location, place, or object
Sounds like correct rejections there. Maybe they should “kick off” those who submit clearly ineligible items? 🤔
I wouldn’t kick them off, but I agree that nominators who submit ineligible subjects like these should face some consequence. I’d take away their 40 submissions, but I’m not in charge, so…
40 from the start once passing the easy repeatable test, is a lot.
If someone timed it well and got to level 38 on Pokémon GO & level 10 on Ingress in the same week, then they could have 80 to start with.
I had one of the only green spaces in the neighborhood that is owned by the utility company because it has a high tension tower rejected because it was on private property ( its not it is owned and maintained by the city of Jtown) and no pedestrian access yet the road and sidewalks are in the picture. It is were everyone steps off the jogging path to rest drink water or meet with neighbors and dog owners relieve there dogs on the walk. There is one stop in half a mile in this neighborhood and this would be a perfect way to get players out if they could actually walk on sideways to a pokestop. If we want people in neighborhoods to get out we need at least a couple stops.
You could show your full nomination in Nomination Improvement and then others may be able to help.
From what you’ve said, this sounds like an uninteresting Natural Feature though, so reject sounds right.
It is a green space with a massive 80 foot tower on the highest point in the neighborhood it stands out.
Safe, pedestrian access isn't just about sidewalks, reviewers could have thought the presence of the high tension tower made it unsafe. (Not saying I agree with that without seeing your nomination, just trying to give insight.)
Nominate the tower if it’s eligible and accessible. The field isn’t something that sounds eligible.
High tension tower means it's utility power lines. The green space might be eligible, but power lines definitely wouldn't.
Here it is. Any help as to how to get it through is appreciated.
Ah I see. Thanks. I hadn’t got that it was a power line from what was said.
So no @DerrickAClark71-PGO that’s not eligible as it’s unsafe.
The field doesn’t sound like it’s a point of interest either to me.
Yeah, erm... no. Big no. A powerline pylon is not a great place to explore, socialize, or exercise at. It's a (dangerous) generic piece of infrastructure.
The only powerline pylon I could even think of being eligible would be the Disney one, near Disney world... But it's still a powerline pylon and off the highway next to a transformer station so its still ineligible...
It doesn't matter if you think it is interesting or not it is a public landmark in the neighborhood with safe public acess and there are no poke stops around it on the walking path. If we want to promote people walking the neighborhood it is a clear choice.
It has to be…a point of interest? Doesn’t matter if you have no PokéStops/Wayspots. If you say it’s a public landmark, does it have a name? A sign? Some history to it? Or is it just the field where the dogs 💩?
Thanks and sorry. I'm really lax when it comes to nature and green spaces, but looking at what you have to work with there, I can't see how you could ever possibly get it accepted. Focus more on the green area and less on the utility tower? but that's never getting through under current criteria.
Ok I guess no suburbs get any pokestops while cities get a stop for every graffiti tag. In town every 5 feet.
At least you now know the rejection was correct and to go and nominate other things.
It is rough in suburb areas, rural wooded areas, etc. If there's no amenities set up for the suburbs, then there's really nothing. A lack of pokestops is not an eligibility criteria nor does it make anything eligible unfortunately.
I get it, I lived in a rural wooded area when PoGo came out then stopped playing for years because I thought the game didn't make sense, that's why I'm in Wayfarer now, to improve the map.
Then the criteria is geared to fail those in nonurban settings from the stated purpose of the game. It is safe I am not leading children to some eletrified substation this is a spot where people already meet a landmark in the highest point neighborhood and on the walking path. There are not many if any other safe, nonresidential spots. If we don't take that in consideration that this is a running walking area with few to no nonresidential properties then were are failing huge segments of potential customers. Just my opinion.
Yes. The criteria definitely benefit cities over rural areas and suburbs, but that's because Niantic's intent is to build a database of landmarks they can sell to other companies, not build a database to help people play their games equally well anywhere.
They have a different view of who their "customers" are. Those of us making wayspots for them aren't customers, we're free labor. (Paid in pokestops and portals, at least.)
Here's some suburb nominations I make all the time and they all get accepted: Public community swimming pools, playgrounds, volleyball courts, basketball courts, sign for a walking path/trail, footbridge on a walking path, tennis courts, community gardens with an actual permanent sign, church or place of worship, gazebo, pavilion.