Editing Instead of Deleting Waypoints
ChefEdge-PGO
Posts: 2 ✭✭
Over the last few days, I have gotten several related potential edits to review, it’s clear a city rec area has been demolished. All of the edits are not to delete the waypoints, but to update the titles and descriptions to say “former” park, “former” walking trail, “former” building, “was demolished in 2019”, etc.
It seems to me these places don’t exist and shouldn’t be waypoints anymore. I don’t want to drive to the city and delete them myself. I also don’t think it’s appropriate to change the new name to say “former”. What would you do here?
Comments
i would use the report abuse button at the bottom right of the edit review on desktop and report it as abuse for attempting to degrade the wayspot. i have no idea if that does anything. then chose your favorite method to report wayspots for removal if you care to pursue it past the review.
This is usually done because removal requests are repeatedly denied and most people see edits as the next best thing to do in order to submit the proof they can't with their removal requests, so they can try to report again more successfully. It's not the right way to do it, but those submissions are well-intentioned and it's not really fair to report those people for abuse; particularly when they're technically not wrong, they are updating the wayspots to be the most up-to-date and accurate reflection of the real-world location 🤷♀️
Personally, if it's additional photos that are obviously the same location with the POI missing and they don't meet photo rejection criteria (which is all you're really asked in review of them) then I'll let them through. If there's title or description edits that don't match the POI (new mural title for one painted over an old one, but without photos accepted to show it yet, for confirmation), I'll reject those. I've not see any "former" edits yet, but that seems like a perfectly accurate edit submission to me, if the POI is clearly gone 🤷♀️
Niantic can call that abuse all they like, if they don't improve the removal reporting system then I have no intention of reporting some poor sods for trying to find another way to do the right thing to keep the database accurate 🤦♀️
I’ve seen several photo edits of buildings being demolished or completely flattened. Why don’t they just post a rejection appeal in this forum with the pictures taken??. 🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
From the information given I don’t see the edits as reportable for abuse.
There is no false information.
As has been mentioned this is a topic that does not go smoothly.
Because people can and do act maliciously the wayfarer team request geotagged photos to show that something no longer exists. There are numerous examples in the forum of people having problems providing what is required to remove a wayspot.
I know a church locally was removed entirely from the database. The building still exists so is a point of interest, and plans for other uses have yet to come into fruition. It would have been more sensible to me to edit it to former church, and then depending on change of use take further action. I may ask for restatement once the future plans are solidified now.
Often people people can’t physically go to place to take photographs and also they may not want to doxx themselves by doing a request on an open forum.
Sometimes removal requests when turned down and the email has said to simply update the photo and text.
Ambassadors have raised this as an issue that needs a better process without doxxing.
If the object in question no longer exists, it should be reported for removal. Changing the title to repurpose the Wayspot is considered abuse and may lead to sanctions. You could report the Wayspot using this form (https://niantic.helpshift.com/hc/en/5-report-an-issue-with-a-pokestop-gym/contact-us/?p=web&contact=1&l=en) if you choose to report it anonymously. You can select 'no' in the property owner drop down and explain the reason for reporting the Wayspot in question.
Thank you for the response Aaron, I will submit something here
the way i mentioned does say something about attempting to downgrade the quality of the wayspot as abuse. i will try to remember to take a screenshot of the exact wording when i get another edit.
oh here we go - this button
gives these options
and includes this
or intentionally degrades Wayspot quality (text, photo, or location).
See, now I'm confused again.
If there is a real-world object, site, or scene and somebody subs in a bad photo or description or tries to move it to an unreasonable spot THAT is abuse.
But if the original interesting thing is gone, editing to show the current facts on the ground doesn't strike me as abusive at all.
If Niantic has a form somewhere hard to find AND the form demands that I lie or misstate facts they've got a lot of nerve calling me abusive for not finding/using that wrong form.
If they cannot communicate correctly, where do they get off calling people out or threatening them?
Niantic needs to make it simple and straightforward to do the right thing, and they need to make it easy to find and simple to understand.
Then, and only then, are they occupying the high moral ground that permits them to judge others.
Many aren't interested or even really aware of the forum, let alone that they can do that here 🤷♀️ Niantic aren't great at really getting people engaged, it's usually personal interest that leads Wayfarers to look around or try to connect with other Wayfarers to get help with issues they're having that leads them here 🤷♀️
Community backlash can also be an issue for some 🤷♀️
Yeah, this never sits well with me. Some poor sod risks "sanctions" now because of Niantic failure to provide simple, accessible, and complete reporting methods 😬
I don't think it's at all reasonable or fair to punish people for going to the effort to try to improve the database with up-to-date information and coming up against red tape bulldust with penalties for their effort 🙄
If Niantic put half as much effort into fixing the reporting (just add a spot to attach evidence, already!) as they do chasing these whispers down every time they arise on the forum, like they're the bloody Gestapo (in stark contrast to the deafening crickets on ML and appeal rejection issues, I'll add), then maybe this relatively simple issue would have been resolved long ago 😒🤦♀️
I totally agree if something has physically ceased to exist it should go. But achieving that can be difficult, time consuming and not obvious or intuitive. There are plenty of posts of people having difficulty proving something no longer exists, and the team quite rightly insisting on solid evidence. Its quite off-putting and I know people who have given up in frustration. Much more commonly it is not totally gone, simply redeveloped eg The George (formally the Old King)
I don't interpret attempts to correct wrong information ie the original situation is no longer accurate to the changed situation, as abusive. That would only be the case if there is a proven attempt to deceive.
Most of these cases are probably ordinary wayfinders trying to do the right thing, but with no easy to find guidance, they use their judgement to find what they think is an accurate solution. Going down the abuse route seems to me a wrong response (unless there is clear evidence of malicious intent), and could well mean we lose a good wayfinder. I would like to have the option to refer an edit to the team - a totally different emphasis in language.
It would be much more appropriate if they could get an email saying something like .....
We notice that you are attempting to change the title [insert location] in a way that indicates that the wayspot is no longer in existence. Unfortunately this is not the correct procedure. Please help us maintain our data base by providing evidence and following this procedure instead.....
That would educate and try and keep the wayfinder engaged and you are more likely to achieve a better database.
I would also like to think that Emily (ML) could be trained to pick up these sorts of phrases so that they could be referred quicker.
I would like a change to have a simple "What do I do if....." So that instructions like the ones @NianticAaron has given above could be simply found for when it has physically gone, with correct language - it is so off putting to fill out a form designed for property owners I would stop at that point. As it stands several of us will book mark this to refer people to, or cut and paste and file away.
Of course if we had a system of managing our edits if you found out you had done the wrong thing I would like to think it could be withdrawn. One day, One day.
if they can figure out how to make an edit, report location is on that same menu. is just as easy to do that as to try to degrade the wayspot. i have a very high success rate with removal reports.
@cyndiepooh-ING what evidence have you had to give?
As I am aware of others try and giving up.
Edited as I forgot about the bad word filter 🤔
? i was only pointing out that the edit and the report options are on the same screen in game. no evidence needed for that.
oh! i was only referring to in game reports. no evidence can be sent with those.
fwiw, in game reports i send are usually decided in 2-3 days. the email for the decision has a clickable button to get to the forum. so i could follow that link if i wanted to pursue a denied report.
Not all submitters can request removals.
Developers, using the Lightship app, have an edit button - but no option to report a wayspot. (They may have a separate path that's Niantic manual intensive - and if so, it probably worked at first but has fallen apart by now.)
They CAN submit name and description edits, then craft their own code to navigate around it.
Hi NianticAaron,
The dropdown box under "Reason for removal request" doesn't have a 'Does not exist' option. Is that something that can be added to the form so we can be sure to be clear and concise with our reports?
There are many cases in which the deletion report is denied because the wayspot's still exists in Google Street View, even after the report is filed.
In some cases, the Wayfarer team even denied the report even though the 360° photo was attached using the form.
I don't understand Wayfinder's intention, but it is possible that he tried to edit the title and description to make it easier to delete as the next best thing, since the usual deletion reports kept getting denied.
(However, it is clear that the method is wrong.)
With this in mind, we need to revamp the deletion reporting system on the game application, although this will require some consultation with the respective game teams.
At the very least, if a wayspot disappears completely, it is possible to ensure quality by having it attach a few geotagged photos showing the situation.
How often is Google Maps updated in your area, though? Street view, specifically? Because I suspect that's part of the issue. Many places around here are 15 years out of date (i.e: it's only been done once ever).
I know what to do and I still haven't bothered bringing this to the forum, because last time I did it was a whole lot of jumping through hoops, got rejected even with evidence and had to provide a heap more, so it hardly seemed worth the effort just to remove something (barely eligible to begin with) that can still be accessed fine, despite no longer existing (what incentive is there if Niantic can't be bothered reading where it says "permanently closed"?) 🤷♀️🤦♀️
The forum link makes no reference to the fact that it can be appealed here, just to "join the conversation", so most will ignore it as simply an option for socialising with other participants. TBF, even after submitting, many still don't even get what Wayfarer is or care. Some don't even get the emails because they used a junk account for their game 🤷♀️
It's all well and good to make comments from our perspective of knowing and good fortune in our attempts, but not everybody does and there's not much in place to really lead them to. I think the lack of empathy and consideration of the perspective of noobs or varying degrees of disengaged users is part of the problem 🤷♀️
The last time I used that form to report some Wayspots on a K-12 school ground I've found during review, they only removed one. I assumed that the remaining Wayspots don't appear in Pokemon GO since they include this text:
We are not accepting any removal request for Portals directly from our end. You can report Portal through our other game, Ingress Prime. You can follow the below steps to report a Portal:
- From the Portal details page, touch the Portal’s photo. Here you can view the Portal’s current description and all of its photos.
- Select REPORT INVALID PORTAL, and choose the reason you believe the Portal is invalid.
What should I do, then?
You can select any reason and mention the correct reason in your report for now. I'll discuss your feedback with the team.
That should not be a problem now.
There is no text box for Remove Invalid Portal. It was removed years ago. When will it be added back?
@NianticAaron Is it always considered abuse to repurpose an existing wayspot, or only when everything about the wayspot is different?
In urban areas it's relatively common for murals to be painted over with other murals after a couple of years. This seems like a hybrid situation because it's the exact same physical object (usually the wall of a building) with different artwork adorning it. In cases like this it seems more valuable to repurpose the original wayspot because doing so preserves an interesting history of the artwork at that location. It's also less disruptive to the playfields of games that use that wayspot. I see mural walls as being similar to the famous Fourth Plinth in London... a fixed exhibition space with rotating artwork. The photos for The Fourth Plinth are really cool because they show a full decade of the art that's been there. (Here's a scanner link for Ingress players who are curious.)
I have seen lots of churches that have changed hands, so the same place of worship gets a new name. I've always approved the new name and photos when I could confirm the change through other information sources. There's also the case where a physical object is replaced with something that serves the exact same purpose. Should we report "Foobar Church Entrance Sign" and submit the new one if Foobar Church upgrades their sign but the new one is in the same location?
If I was king of the universe my decision would be:
Different object, different purpose: Remove the old wayspot and submit a new one.
Same physical object, different artwork or name but same function: Keep the existing wayspot and update the photo and/or title.
Different physical object, same location and purpose: Keep the existing wayspot and update the photo.
If you delete and recreate, SCANS ARE LOST.
If a church or brewery changes hands, the old scans of it are still fine.
And functionally, it's still the same place, emitting XM for the same reasons.