Invalid Wayspot Appeals(K-12)

tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,357 ✭✭✭✭✭

Title of the Wayspot: HOLSTEIN BLDG


City: Sapporo,Hokkaido

Country: Japan

This wayspot is a building owned by the Hokkaido Holstein Agricultural Cooperative Association, which has offices in the building, and a child daycare center is co-located on the second floor of the complex.

And the street view shows that the child daycare center has been there for some time, not that it was moved in yesterday or today.

Therefore, the reviewer who gave this a high score is a low-quality reviewer who does not understand the criteria.

I would like to see this removed as a K-12 facility and would like to see them retrained.,141.345809,3a,42.9y,274.86h,105.8t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sj2wg0aDmh7NA0P7ycEFFTw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?hl=ja&authuser=0



  • NianticLCNianticLC Posts: 4,249 admin

    Thanks for the appeal, @tp235-ING! We took another look at the Wayspot in question and decided that it does not meet our criteria for removal at this time.

  • TWVer-INGTWVer-ING Posts: 774 ✭✭✭✭✭

    For those who don't understand this decision, let me explain.

    The wayspot is the entire building. The daycare is only part of the building. Therefor K-12 does not apply for the building. There are non-K-12 parts of the building.

    It doesn't matter that a wayspot contains a K-12 area, as long as it also has a non-K-12 area, K-12 doesn't apply. K-12 only applies to the K-12 area itself and objects located inside of it.

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,357 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That matter could be compatible if the entrances and exits are different, but in this case the entrances and exits are completely shared.

    The only other difference is whether it is deployed horizontally or vertically.

    I would venture to say that the vertical orientation would eliminate even more of the qualifying factors than the horizontal orientation where there is a mix of qualifying and non-conforming buildings on the same site.

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,357 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Please note that there is a delay in displaying the response to the LC.

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,357 ✭✭✭✭✭

    This is the same case.

    Even if there is a qualifier (a church that meets Social's requirements), if there is a K-12 facility on the same site, the nonqualifier will be given priority.

  • TWVer-INGTWVer-ING Posts: 774 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It is only relevant whether the object you are nominating is K-12 itself, of located inside a K-12 area. If the object itself contains a K-12 area, but isn't K-12 itself, it shouldn't be rejected for K-12. It doesn't matter that the entrance is shared. If the entrance is shared, it is not part of the K-12 area. It doesn't matter what is above or below. Only the daycare itself and anything located inside is K-12. The rest of the building and the building itself are not.

    Niantic is not familiar with your area and doesn't speak your language. That makes it hard for them to make a correct judgement. You presented the other case as the church is part of the preschool. If you had presented it as the preschool is part of the church, the decision may have been different. I too am unfamiliar with your area and language, so I can't say if the other decision was correct or you misrepresented it.

    And Niantic are just people too, and they too can make mistakes.

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,357 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The WAYSPOT, which has previously been opined for deletion, indicates a church.

    The church itself is a POI that encourages community and qualifies in its own right.

    However, the entrance and grounds are shared with a kindergarten.

    Thus, a K-12 is usually preferred for a wayspot that shares an entrance and exit.

    Also, a WAYSPOT that was previously removed under normal reporting has been removed because of the presence of a preschool in the same building, as in this case.

  • TWVer-INGTWVer-ING Posts: 774 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The map you included in your appeal has the area the church is located in marked as "Preschool site". This implies the church is part of the school, not the other way around. That the church is mostly used by the school, not by the community. If that is not the case, then you misdirected NianticVK into taking the wrong decision.

    Where did you get the shared entrance and exit idea from? There is nothing in the criteria that states anything beyond the K-12 area should also be considered K-12. K-12 is only the K-12 area itself, not any shared area's. In this case, the first floor of the building, minus any common area's like the staircase.

    As said before, Niantic people are people, people make mistakes. A decision on an appeal can be wrong. Here is another example. Initially NianticLC believed the OP that the wayspot was a duplicate of the playground and removed it. After the community had the wayspot accepted again, the OP tried to get it removed again. I noticed and correctly explained the situation, and NianticLC made a different (correct) decision the second time.

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,357 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Your way of saying that playground equipment on the grounds of an elementary school or a soccer field on the grounds of a high school qualifies.

    The reality is that those are correct to deny.

    It is the same thing that Tintino was accused of by many Wayfinders the other day for mentioning a basketball court.

    And the difference between ingress/egress and site is important in our determination of eligibility and ineligibility.

    In the case of this wayspot, as a practical matter, we would be blocking the entrance and exit of a K-12 facility that falls under the removal criteria.

    If such a situation existed in the real world with daycare children being dropped off and picked up by their fathers and mothers on their way to and from preschool, we would be reported by daycare officials and parents and questioned by police officers.

    Also, such cases have been similar before.

    In the past, I have intentionally nominated such wayspot with a flaw that is repudiated in measuring the level of reviewers.

    Naturally, I thought it would be denied.

    However, it went live by a low-quality reviewer.

    I then filed a deletion report myself, and wayspot was removed.

    This was a qualified candidate because it was a gymnasium, but it was also a preschool, which is the criteria for deletion.

    This is the same thing.

  • auntergoafa-PGOauntergoafa-PGO Posts: 99 ✭✭✭

    @TWVer-ING Your points are clear and totally correct. 

    @tp235-ING There is no need to complicate matters. Just consider who owns the property on which this sign is located.

  • TWVer-INGTWVer-ING Posts: 774 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Your way of saying that playground equipment on the grounds of an elementary school or a soccer field on the grounds of a high school qualifies.

    That is not what I said. Do you really not see the difference or are you just trolling now?

  • 82quuu-PGO82quuu-PGO Posts: 277 ✭✭✭

    This is something I would avoid reviewing if possible.

    Since the nursery is a tenant of an office building, it would be difficult to reject it on the grounds of an educational facility.

    However, I hesitate to approve it because I can confirm the existence of the daycare on Street View.

    I know it's hard to remove spots, but I don't think it's a good spot.

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,357 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2023

    I posted a similar case in the past, but it was not reflected forever, so I reported the same thing again yesterday in the help chat and it was removed.

    This thread has served its purpose and should be closed.

  • TWVer-INGTWVer-ING Posts: 774 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @NianticLC , could you please take a look a this again. It looks like OP got this one removed through other means dispite it not meeting removal criteria.

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,357 ✭✭✭✭✭

    There have already been several cases identical to this case, and these were removed because the removal criteria were met for them.

    And LC is a new administrator who logged in in August 2022, so he just didn't know about similar cases in the past.

    Therefore, I just gave Niantic again the same case where I removed my own nominated wayspot myself.

  • TWVer-INGTWVer-ING Posts: 774 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Similar cases in the past are irrelevant, as they could be wrong decisions, or made when the criteria were different.

    With your logic, if the Burj Khalifa has 1 room in it that is used as a daycare, the entire building and site would be considered K-12. And that is just ridiculous.

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,357 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I have received several similar decisions about this over the years to date.

    There have also been many deletions that have been handled with a regular deletion report, such as the example I just gave you.

    I am sure you will understand this when you see my past deletion postings involving K-12 facilities.

    And I have one piece of advice for you.

    What you are doing to this thread, which has served its purpose, is clear vandalism.

    I do not like such behavior and you should not engage in it.

    Please leave this thread before I report you.

  • TWVer-INGTWVer-ING Posts: 774 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I already explained that similar decisions don't matter. And I can't read Japanese, so those screenshots mean nothing to me.

    All I do is try to explain to you why this location is not K-12, and why NianticLC did not remove the wayspot. Now that you have your desired outcome, you want to close this thread and shut everyone up. Even threatening me. But go ahead. Report me if that makes you feel better. I'm not the one in the wrong here.

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,357 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Likewise I am not wrong.

    The decision before and now is also a decision that is consistent with Niantic's removal requirements respecting the rules of the real world.

    And you can walk away from here.


    You should look at your own agent profile page.

    There is no persuasive power there.

  • TWVer-INGTWVer-ING Posts: 774 ✭✭✭✭✭

    @NianticLC, @NianticOtoStar, could someone please take another look at this wayspot?

    It is an office building that has a daycare on one of the floors. Since the nomination is for the entire building, and the building itself is shared use, the building itself should not be considered K-12. @NianticLC already confirmed that it did not meet the criteria for removal, but OP went behind their back and managed to get the wayspot removed anyway through the help chat.

    Can this wayspot be reinstated, as it does not meet removal criteria?

  • tp235-INGtp235-ING Posts: 1,357 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2023

    There is no change in K-12 standards from past to present.

    If the property is on the same site and shares the same entrance, the K-12 nonconforming standards take precedence.

    You are here to troll.

    Your actions are an appeal to emotion and an attempt to twist standards.

    We can play by the tolerance of the real world. You need to learn the rules of the real world.

    Please get out of here.

    Post edited by tp235-ING on
Sign In or Register to comment.