If you are too lazy to do research then DO NOT take part in voting

3 of my 4 submissions got rejected. Only 1 of them I can understand. But the other two got rejected for incredibly stupid reasons. A simple look at OSM or actually at the satellite view of google maps was all that was required to approve 2 of these submissions.

The first was a painting on the wall in an outside pool. Easy to see, even if the public pool is closed, it was NOT on private property and there was a school and like 3 parking spaces around the spot. There was also another already accepted spot at the other end of the public pool (outside of the building). You can walk around the public pool completely in one go, without ever coming near a car, since there are stairs and an access way all around the pool. Yet it was rejected because there were no SAFE SPACES around the PUBLIC POOL!?! Are you kidding me? Yeah, the way, lots of student use to get to their school are actually NOT SAFE according to some lazy reviewers not doing their job.

Second was a Jesus Cross, standing near a gardening area. Easy accessible (next to a hiking way), forbidden for cars AND it was even shown in OPENSTREETMAP. It clearly says (next to a cross symbol) "Kriegsjahr 1916" (Year of war 1916). My submission was "Kreuz Kriegsjahr 1916" (Cross year of war 1916). The marker was positioned maybe within 2m (~7 feet) around the exact location (for cell reasons). This was everything but a difficult one. Crosses are fine, about 10 in and around my town are stops and the location was even marked in OSM. But enough lazy voters did NOT do their jobs to rate these spots correctly. Even a google search brought up an article about that exact cross and its location!!!

And there I am, checking every single spot I have to check carefully, using 3 different map services, using the street and sattellite view, googling if these submitted things really exist (i.e. football clubs etc.), really consider things like if people have to cross streets to get to somewhere and so on.

In the meanwhile spots like "Thing near a pool" (a sculpture) or "Yellow Pole" (just a yellow pole at a field) get accepted and my carefully picked ones are not.

So if YOU, yes YOU reading this are too LAZY to do your JOB in rating and therefore RESEARCHING submitted spots, if not clearly visible then better not rate anything at all. I had to wait 4 months for the cross submission only for it to get rejected by some lazy reviewers. This is incredibly sad.

If there was a $4.99 item to buy to get a stop re-reviewed by some ELITE reviewers knowing what they are doing, I'd be letting it get reviewed by them. But only if acceptal by the ELITE team would make sure these lazy reviewers who denied my submission would never have to be able to review my submissions again!


  • 1world1team-PGO1world1team-PGO Posts: 13 ✭✭

    Pools are 1* as far as I know .... probably wont get those through at all .

    I would say your cross submission should qualify if its this one but maybe lost in translation? You should appeal -> What I found by googling Kreuz Kriegsjahr 1916 http://www.navicache.com/cgi-bin/db/displaycache2.pl?CacheID=8388

  • Gendgi-PGOGendgi-PGO Posts: 3,277 Ambassador

    Since this is "nomination improvement," would you mind sharing key aspects of your nomination so we can assist making sure this atrocity doesn't happen again?

  • I would guess your pool mural was rejected for being too close to the school. Maybe?

  • Legacy4N00b-PGOLegacy4N00b-PGO Posts: 78 ✭✭✭
    edited September 2020

    Hi, it'll be great if you attach some pictures of your submissions and reasons for their rejection. We need to examine them not from your perspective, but from reviewers side.

    Mural inside a swimming pool counts as part of its site, therefore ineligible.

  • cyndiepooh-INGcyndiepooh-ING Posts: 868 ✭✭✭✭✭

    i made a post in general discussions about the reasons for rejection in the email often having nothing to do with the actual reasons for rejection. that's on niantic, not the reviewers. for example, a reflective trail marker was rejected as something found in nature. but i realized that the shadow of my arm was in the full photo the reviewers saw, resubmitted with a photo without a shadow, and it went through. i wish we could get the rejection email statements improved, but blasting reviewers in the wrong channel isn't going to help that.

  • Gendgi-PGOGendgi-PGO Posts: 3,277 Ambassador

    Respectfully, a mural next to or adjacent of a pool would still be eligible on its own merit. It could be ineligible if, say, the mural is at the bottom of the pool, but as long as the mural can be safely reached and touched without entering the water, it should not be rejected. That comment, of course, is not attempting to defend the rejection the original post mentioned without knowing full details.

  • This was the cross submission:

    Left is google, right is OSM


    You can even see the cross in satellite view on Google on the right hand side of the road near the corner.

    The "Schwörzweg" is closed for cars and motorbikes!

    Title: Kreuz Kriegsjahr 1916 (Cross Year of War 1916)

    Beschreibung (Description)

    Gedenkkreuz für die im 1.Weltkrieg gefallenen Soldaten aus Oberkochen.

    (Cross for the fallen Soldiers of WW1 in Oberkochen)

    Additional picture for location:

    Additional text:

    Schönes Kreuz mit historischem Hintergrund gelegen am Rand einer Kleingartenanlage. Der Weg ist für Autos und Krafträder gesperrt, daher ideal als Treffpunkt. Marker zellenbedingt leicht versetzt.

    (Beautiful Cross with historical background at the end of a garden area. The way is closed for card and motorbikes, thus ideal as meeting point. Marker was set off by a little because of the cells.)


    Thank you for nominating Kreuz Kriegsjahr 1916 on May 17, 2020. Upon review by the Niantic community of players, we regret to inform you that this nomination is ineligible.

    This nomination has been rejected due to the following reason(s):

    Insufficient evidence that the nomination accurately reflects the submitted real-world location based on comparison of the submitted photo and map views.

  • And for the pool post, keep in mind that it's about the mural, not the pool itself!!!


    Additional photo showing that the mural can be seen from outside, even when the pool is closed:


    Google: https://www.google.com/maps/@48.7882055,10.11382,77m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=de

    OSM: https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=oberkochen#map=19/48.78825/10.11416

    Description: Die Schüler der nahegelegenen Schule haben dieses Kunstwerk angefertigt.

    (Students from the nearby school created this piece of art)

    You cannot take a better photo of it since cameras are forbidden inside the pool (obviously). But it's still a nice mural.

    Rejection reason according to the mail was no safe spaces around....

    With like 100 stairs leading up to the school nearby and pedestrian ways to the pool and a basketball field nearby....

    Oh and just to add to the insult of rejection, this is the ACCEPTED spot in the city 40km away...:

    "Greetings from yellow pole" !!!

  • Kellerrys-INGKellerrys-ING Posts: 694 ✭✭✭✭✭

    As a general advice, forget the OSM as "evidence". It's not realistic to assume people spend time to research two different maps.


    Cross seems eligible, but even after your explanation I'm not sure where it's supposed to be. It's just not clear from the satellite view if one is not familiar with the area.

    Also, you pretty made certain I would have rejected it because of mismatched location. "Marker zellenbedingt leicht versetzt." Without that comment; location 3*-4* (benefit of doubt etc.), with that 1* (certain it's misplaced).

    Could you provide a link (for example history of the town article, local memorial catalogue/list) for reviewers to confirm the approximate location?

  • Misch60-PGOMisch60-PGO Posts: 224 ✭✭✭

    Because the photo is taken from outside the pool, and behind a fence, it could be that reviewers think it is not safely accessible for pedestrians. Not saying it is not safe, but I can see why reviewers may think that.

  • Explanation for the cross marker placing on the satellite view of google maps. Matches exactly with the OSM location.

    Yes I cannot EXPECT people to use OSM and most times it's not necessary. But if you cannot find it on google etc, you can use OSM for clarification. It's not that much of an effort. Oh and there are browser plugins for wayfarer and they offer OSM.

    But yes, I understand, it's easier to rate everything with 1 star, than really doing the work, but that's why I titled this post the way I did.

    Only conclusion I can take from it:

    • I should not use OSM, others won't do it too
    • Don't take a closer look, just say no if it's not clearly visible
    • Move to a big city with hundreds of spots and great google maps support
    • Give a damn about players in smaller cities / places and accept the miserable experience players have
    • Accept that the system has terrible flaws.


    • try to change the way it is but realize that no one gives a damn but you
    • just submit the same spot like 5 times per 2 weeks and hope one of them will pass

  • Misch60-PGOMisch60-PGO Posts: 224 ✭✭✭

    Well no, I wouldn't say that is the conclusion you should take. I submitted a few stops in rural areas and they get accepted. To support those areas is great to do.

    Spend time on whether a place is eligible is good, though of course, you can't take eternity to judge them, as there is a limit on the time you can spend to judge one. Sometimes reviewers may just disagree with the submitter about its eligibility, sometimes the reviewer is not good at all. So of course, there is partly luck in place too for if your stop gets reviewed by a better reviewer. However, to rant about it here, does not help with improving your nomination I think, how unfortunate that may be.

  • Sugarstarzkill-PGOSugarstarzkill-PGO Posts: 437 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I'm not sure why the mural was rejected. Mentioning the school nearby will likely hurt more than help though, FYI. Also it seems like there is some confusion about pools, since they were once eligible, then deemed mostly ineligible later. I'm guessing a lot of people are unsure if they can approve items NEXT to a pool.

    For your cross, positioning incorrectly like that will most often get it rejected because of mismatched location or, people will move the marker to the correct location. Any mention of misplacing things for cell reasons may also lead to people reporting it as abuse.

  • Kellerrys-INGKellerrys-ING Posts: 694 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The first conclusion should be that you're ranting and being rude to the wrong people/audience.

    The second conclusion you should make is that people don't necessarily have Wayfarer+ plugins or even translator tools installed and may even be using their small mobile phones to review.

    The third conclusion should be that don't make people to search for the information thinking it's not a big a deal, offer it (in this case with a link). In my experience people often do check the facts, but don't necessarily look for those if it's not relatively easy.

    As a sidenote, this is what clicking the title would offer me as a result.

    The fourth conclusion should be that next time don't mention the pin is slightly misplaced. Also, place the pin on the same grass area as the cross, not in the middle of the Schwörzweg.

Sign In or Register to comment.