Live in Wayfarer 3.1 is a new set of acceptance criteria! Please browse the information in this category with caution as it is in reference to the previous review guidelines. To learn more about the new criteria, see here:

Rules/Regulations Signs

Alright, so one of the featured waypoints on wayfarer for my area right now is this "Bark Rules" sign, a rules sign for a dog park.

The park has a name sign submitted and approved before this one was approved (though they were submitted at the same time, so local reviewers probably caught this without the name sign as a waypoint), so it's not a stand-in for the park. It's literally just a rules sign.

I remember this submission. I debated about it for a while because it's more interesting than a standard rules sign, but I eventually ended up giving it a rejection for not meeting the guidelines since I thought it ultimately didn't meet guidelines as an interesting POI.

I tried searching for previously posted threads on rules signs, but all I could find was a reddit thread about standard rules signs and a couple commentors all saying they rejected or rated low for those.

So, am I being too strict? Are rules sign valid waypoints? Is this one valid because it's more interesting than a standard rules/regulations sign? Did it maybe get enough positive reviews before the name sign was approved that it went ahead and went through? Did this person just get lucky? (I saw this person talking about upgrading their submission, so I do also know for a fact that this was an upgraded submission and not one that just got through locally.)

Trying to become the best reviewer I can, so thanks for any and all input!


  • sogNinjaman-INGsogNinjaman-ING Posts: 3,313 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Invalid for me.

  • Raachermannl-INGRaachermannl-ING Posts: 1,046 ✭✭✭✭✭

    In cases like yours ....

    If you nominate this sign as a sign, then I have to reject, because there is no educational content given to call it infoboard in the sense of the criteria.

    If you nominate this sign as a plausible proxy dedicated to a dog park ..... maybe one can convince me to give 4* .... but this depends on surroundings in RL and ingame, whether I would do this. Most likely not, I think ...

  • phi2458-PGOphi2458-PGO Posts: 164 ✭✭✭

    According to Niantic Wayfarer Clarifications: January 2020, if the item in the park is visually distinct, it is eligible. In my opinion, the signboard has a unique design and doesn’t fall into the category of non-unique nominations such as trash cans, drinking water fountains, etc. As a result, the board is eligible.

    I’m open-minded to different opinions. Please tell me if I’m wrong.

  • Raachermannl-INGRaachermannl-ING Posts: 1,046 ✭✭✭✭✭

    My understanding of the sentence you marked is, that they only state, that there are multiple wayspots allowed, and the point with "visually distinct" considers, that often there is a lot of symmetry in park planning. So the same objects can appear multiple. So the point "individual feature" means, that evrything should be reviewed independently (as long as visually unique) and not be treated as subset of the park, which could end up as strange duplicate decision or rejection.

    Using your interpretation of the sentence nearly evrything would be eligible: even a dog puup bag dispenser .... that would be crazy xD

    So the sentence under your mark is here important. To forge an oppinion about OP's example there would be more information about the nomination necessary to decide, whether this sign is a valid proxy for a park, or simply a boring/generic rule list.

  • phi2458-PGOphi2458-PGO Posts: 164 ✭✭✭

    Honestly, I think the sentence that I marked states the criteria for acceptance in this context. If the sentence means reviewing it as an individual feature, the clarifications would state it directly, like the statement in “Outdoor and Indoor Playgrounds.”

    According to the clarification, a dog puup bag dispenser would be ineligible because it is not visually distinct. If the dispenser has a unique design that makes it visually distinct, then why not accept it?

    Back to the rule sign example, if it is an ordinary rule sign, it would probably be ineligible. However, in this example, the design of the rule sign makes it unique. In my opinion, it would be eligible.

  • TorvoTeratos-PGOTorvoTeratos-PGO Posts: 161 ✭✭✭

    I realize that simply saying it in my OP isn't the same as seeing for yourself. Not on ingress, so I can't provide a reference there, but the person submitting these stops has submitted all of them because there was previously no stops at this park, so there shouldn't be any hidden waypoints here.

    Images linked for hugeness, here's what the park/area stops look like so far (screenshots from silph):

    To be fair, my memory was off about there being a name sign. The park (which is a dog park, by the way) is nominated under the entrance of the park, which is also designated with a unique feature - an arch with a metal dog on top - rather than a name sign.

    At the very least, this discussion gives me more insight as to why other reviewers decided to approve the stop! Thanks everyone for your opinions so far.

  • Gazzas89-PGOGazzas89-PGO Posts: 2,298 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'm in 2 minds for this. Part of me wants to accept one of them for the pun of bark rules, so long as it was just 1 off and it would be a 4 star. If it eas for a proxy of the park and it was the first for the oark, again, I would accept it, but then would reject any other signs regardless of if it was for the park or for the sign itself

Sign In or Register to comment.