How is this not acceptable?
Garfieldfreakje-ING
Posts: 218 ✭✭✭
So i nominated something and i really getting frustrated everytime i upgrade something it gets rejected due to rediculous reasons this time i nominated this
This is a bunker from world war two that has been rebuild so bats can live in this
Why do i get a reason that it doens't meet acceptance criteria?
I am so done with reviewing because of this i get an upgrade i upgrade something a few hours later rejected
Comments
is it on private property?
Public path ?
Did the title match what it really is ? - Bat Cave ?
No not on private property you can see on the supporting picture a clear path so yes and yes bats live now in the bunker because that's why there is a little plaque on it and it only got rejected because of it doens't meet acceptance criteria nothing else
And i called it bat cave because i thought your titles should be original but i guess next time i just say bunker
I would say same it Historical Bunker and make sure you put relevant info and that its not in use - if you can find a sign thats even better.
Why isn't it relevant to say that it is now also a living place for bats i might put an article link of it in de supporting information
Bat cave might get "natural feature" ? I am not sure but thats probably how I might rate it
Because bat houses aren't eligible stops, but historic structures are. It's a nice additional piece of information, but doesn't explain why it should be in the game, which is based upon the role that this played in defense of Britain.
I think this will eventually get approved; however, many reviewers only want historic structures will plaques, so you might need to continue resubmitting until it's approved. Don't lose heart if that happens.
Submit the plaque, not a photo of a concrete box.
Agreed. The plaque should be in the focus.
The plaque only says friendly place for bats it doesn't say anything about the bunker
It should also be noted that bats are an endangered species in the Netherlands, and it is illegal to even disturb them. Maybe that's why it gets rejected. Also, even if it's not specifically said in guidelines, I am certain Niantic wouldn't want wayspots that will interfere with local law.
Second time upgraded it now with the name bunker with a link to a website which said that this is a bunker and now also a resting place for bats now these are the reasons
I am so done with upgrading stuff that is clearly a good nomination
The real-world location of the nomination could not be confirmed to have an acceptable pedestrian pathway leading up to it, Nomination does not meet acceptance criteria, Nomination title or description is not relevant
I am so done with upgrading stuff that is clearly a good nomination
It's not clear if upgraded nominations are more likely to get approved, from talking to people it seems that it might in fact be the opposite. Upgrades get reviewed quicker, but they also have a larger pool of reviewers from across the country and who appear to be more negative than local reviewers. Many people I know won't upgrade candidates like this because of how unpredictable upgraded reviews are.
That's what i mean by not doing upgrades anymore
maybe if you gave reasons as to why you would bring a visitor there?? If bats are endangered, perhaps people shouldn't be there to disturb them.
I don't think this is a clearly good nomination. Is a bunker historic or just old? How common are derelict bunkers that are now good bat homes? There is definitely nothing aesthetically pleasing about the nomination. I am not saying it is not eligible, it just isn't clear that it is a good candidate.
don't mention the bats. I'd reject it as not safe, or the focus is on live animals, because the bats could attack people that get to close, or the reverse, bringing attention to them cause disrupt their eco system.