There is a similar sign with the same name very close to your nomination. So I would probably suggest to change the title a little bit and tell the reviewers that it's a different sign and not a duplicate!
In fairness the signs don't look close and they do look different.
I regularly see much, much smaller parks have multiple Welcome to X park signs usually with a North, South, East West etc tagged onto their name irrespective of whether they are in the North, South, East or West of the park.
Technically there should only be one wayspot to represent the whole park, unless a specific entrance has something unique about it that makes it a distinct POI. This is one of the more often ignored rules though.
" In order for multiple entrances to the same park to be considered eligible, they would need to be either unique and differentiate-able from one another or far enough from one another to truly be independent from one another. The same sign at two different sides of a small park would not be far or unique enough to be considered separate Wayspots. "
Which in itself is ambiguous. Define unique, define small park, define far enough away.
It's understandable that submitters are baffled and frustrated when they have seen Blah Park SE entrance, Blah Park NW entrance, Blah Park NWSSW entrance then their submission is rejected.
By my interpretation, the absolute minimum would be about 500m apart, though more like 800 m (half a mile), so that if you're standing at the POI at one entrance, you can't see the POI for the other in-game (Pogo has a longer visual distance than Ingress). I feel like the "multiple entrances can be POIs" is meant to apply to huge parks like national parks where entrances are miles apart. Or maybe like the north and south ends of NYC Central Park. Not every sidewalk that leads into a municipal park that just takes up a city block. But since Niantic has never given hard numbers, just my interpretation.
The size is tricky as I think these are very country dependant. Everything is smaller and closer in the U.K. 😎
also it is about access. A park might not be that big but have two very distinct access points ie if you were not to go through the park the two access points are far apart.
Why does it matter if I can see the other entrance? What if it's 450m away?
It's not that I particularly agree or disagree with that interpretation or even think that my interpretation is correct and yours isn't.
The problem for me lies in Niantic's either indifference or inability to run Wayfarer correctly and their increasingly absurd, Kafkaesque attempts at trying to do so over the last 6 months.
The general understanding is that “not visually unique” is not supposed to be a rejection reason, but for some unknown reason it gets populated into the system when a nomination gets a lot of “Duplicate” votes but not enough to actually call it “Duplicate.” I know that’s only mildly helpful, but Niantic is often only mildly helpful, so here we are.
A resubmission is somewhat likely to get similar results so long as another sign is available and obvious on the map of nearby POIs.
PepeFuentez-PGO
Posts: 31 ✭✭
Comments
There is a similar sign with the same name very close to your nomination. So I would probably suggest to change the title a little bit and tell the reviewers that it's a different sign and not a duplicate!
If a nearby sign is already being used as an anchor for the park, then this would be a duplicate.
In fairness the signs don't look close and they do look different.
I regularly see much, much smaller parks have multiple Welcome to X park signs usually with a North, South, East West etc tagged onto their name irrespective of whether they are in the North, South, East or West of the park.
Technically there should only be one wayspot to represent the whole park, unless a specific entrance has something unique about it that makes it a distinct POI. This is one of the more often ignored rules though.
Has the general stance changed since this?
" In order for multiple entrances to the same park to be considered eligible, they would need to be either unique and differentiate-able from one another or far enough from one another to truly be independent from one another. The same sign at two different sides of a small park would not be far or unique enough to be considered separate Wayspots. "
Which in itself is ambiguous. Define unique, define small park, define far enough away.
It's understandable that submitters are baffled and frustrated when they have seen Blah Park SE entrance, Blah Park NW entrance, Blah Park NWSSW entrance then their submission is rejected.
The other sign looks like this
It's definitely a different design but unique enough?
It looks to be about 100-150m away from the submission.
Far enough away?
Far enough away for a park of Brookwood's size?
Is Brookwood a small park, medium sized park, big park?
By my interpretation, the absolute minimum would be about 500m apart, though more like 800 m (half a mile), so that if you're standing at the POI at one entrance, you can't see the POI for the other in-game (Pogo has a longer visual distance than Ingress). I feel like the "multiple entrances can be POIs" is meant to apply to huge parks like national parks where entrances are miles apart. Or maybe like the north and south ends of NYC Central Park. Not every sidewalk that leads into a municipal park that just takes up a city block. But since Niantic has never given hard numbers, just my interpretation.
The size is tricky as I think these are very country dependant. Everything is smaller and closer in the U.K. 😎
also it is about access. A park might not be that big but have two very distinct access points ie if you were not to go through the park the two access points are far apart.
So I think this needs judgement.
Why does it matter if I can see the other entrance? What if it's 450m away?
It's not that I particularly agree or disagree with that interpretation or even think that my interpretation is correct and yours isn't.
The problem for me lies in Niantic's either indifference or inability to run Wayfarer correctly and their increasingly absurd, Kafkaesque attempts at trying to do so over the last 6 months.
The general understanding is that “not visually unique” is not supposed to be a rejection reason, but for some unknown reason it gets populated into the system when a nomination gets a lot of “Duplicate” votes but not enough to actually call it “Duplicate.” I know that’s only mildly helpful, but Niantic is often only mildly helpful, so here we are.
A resubmission is somewhat likely to get similar results so long as another sign is available and obvious on the map of nearby POIs.