It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In with Ingress Sign In with Pokémon GO
Recommend Remove and Replace.
There is a lot of confusion and argument over some of the terms used in Niantic AMAs / POI submission guideance, with some people complaining about things because they do not understand how the terms are used or acting like corporate lawyers and insisting that a paricular singular meaning. Would it be possible for Niantic to define some of these terms in a single place under an "official" Niantic tag so we have some point of reference for the guidelines and to re-stress how POI subs should be evaluated.. I'm thinking along the lines of things like:
"Eligible". This means the POI submission can be considered as a potential POI. However, being "eligible" does not mean a POI submission is or should be automatically accepted - all of the Wayfarer criteria for this submission still need to be evaluated individually.
"Historic", as in an "Historic building". This means the POI submission can be considered as a potential POI. However, being "historic" or "old" does not mean a POI submission is or should be automatically accepted - all of the Wayfarer criteria for this submission still need to be evaluated individually.
Etc etc - sure the community could come up with a few more. It would help greatly.
Do you plan to terminate the screening of nominations submitted by Scanner [REDACTED]?
It is difficult to know nomination episodes and detailed information only with the title and one image.
It has already been 1 year since the end of Scanner [REDACTED].
Currently, most of the nominations submitted by Scanner [REDACTED] are duplicated or have to be evaluated low (for lack of information).
It is possible that these nominations are delaying the review of new nominations.
Can you reconfigure the algorithm behind cooldowns to better understand real user behaviour and encourage more voting?
Currently I get hit with a cooldown/mistaken for a bot every dozen reviews, and it tanks my score. The only way to prevent this is to close my phone for a minute between filling out the review and hitting submit, and to review less in one sitting.
Why do cooldown need to be on such a hair trigger/cause our scores to go down now?
As we know Niantic is US-based and therefore works in English, how can we conciliate language differences between criteria guidelines? Is the English version the only "official" version to be considered in case of differences?
As a french speaking reviewer, I noticed some differences between the english version and the french version of the criteria. Not every non-english speaker takes times to read the english version nor he takes time to come here and search if there are other clarifications. The consequences are that the interpretation of some criterias are different according to the country (not only because of any "local values", but because of how the guidelines are written in their language.)
Here are a few examples :
"Signs for locations/objects that are already existing Wayspots", the french version reads : "Signs indicating locations / objects already qualified as Wayspots" :
The word "enceinte" in french (english would be "inside the enclosure") vs "grounds" for the K-12/school criteria :
The word "région" vs. "area" :
I know a submitter test, similar to the reviewer test, has been brought up before. In the same thought line, have there been any thoughts about having new rules such as the AMAs or the new Clarifications pop up a prompt like a new policy/terms/procedures does? Like have the submitters and reviewers directed to the new guidelines before they can review or submit when new guidelines have came out since they have submitted or reviewed. If they are a first time reviewer or submitter, having the general rules page or the latest guidelines prompt up would be good.
It would be wonderful to have the additional prompt to direct to the new guidelines/policy. This can be helpful to submitters and reviewers to actually read the new guidelines. In addition, if there is an acknowledgment statement or box to check confirming that they have read the new rules can also be helpful. This places standardization to get submitters and reviewers on the same page. Hopefully this would get more players to understand what criteria makes an eligible/ineligible wayspot. There have been frustrations because submitters don't know the rules before submitting so nominations for wayspots like Starbucks, or elementary schools are being submitted (both not eligible). There is also frustration due to eligible nominations, like trail markers and apartment complex playgrounds, still being rejected for does not meet criteria, even with the inclusion of the AMAs or clarifications in supporting.
About transit stations: can there come more definition about transit stations? There are bus stations(not single ones) near the train station, but they're getting reclined for not meeting acceptance criteria.
An additional optional field for submissions in both Pokemon Go and Ingress submissions for "Supporting Documentation URL" that would show in Wayfarer Reviews as a preview image. Such a field could be scanned for malicious content on the server side and suppressed if such content was found. This new feature would accomplish several goals:
As this feature would aid both submitters and reviewers, I feel it should be considered as a possible in-game addition.
Agreed, and a further comment.
So "transit hubs" are eligible, as they are transit stations where multiple routes interlink, and very often you can transfer between different services (ie. think transferring between trains, the local municipal bus service, intercity Greyhound, etc). At most of these places you can also purchase tickets for any of the lines that stop there.
My city has one spot just like that ... except it is outdoors. The only permanent structures are: some shelters for waiting riders, an automated ticket booth, and some posted signs that indicate the lines' schedules.
On all counts, it qualifies as per the written rules (transit hub, permanent man-made structures), but ... Wayfarer reviewers seem to absolutely disagree. It seems that with the lack of an independent building, nobody wants to vote this one in.
(For bonus points, the last overly nitpicky reasons reviewers denied it because ... my photo had a PUBLIC TRANSIT bus with a "personally identifiable" license plate showing. Argh.)
But. This isn't the AMA for "guidance criteria", so meh. We can waits.
What is the difference between putting 1* in the first question, with the reason for rejection being Title or Description, comparted to putting 1* in the Title and Description section? Same question goes for the other categories that have their own 1-5* rating, such as pedestrian access.
It feels strange that there are two ways to communicate the same thing (Bad title) and we don't know which way is the best way to do it. To further the question, if I'm reviewing an excellent wayspot nomination, but the title is heinously bad, should I just 1* the whole thing for "Title or Description" as the reason? Or should I 5* the whole thing, and put 1* in the Title and Description section specifically.
Would it be possible to send nominations for review to reviewers only in the country in which they were nominated? This would be limited by a false rejection due to the language barrier and ignorance of the site. Example - in the Czech Republic we check German nominations, Germany does not have street maps in place, I can't judge whether the nomination is correctly placed and whether it really is there.
How to handle false rejections of valid POIs. Example of a trail signpost with a destination - temporary, seasonal. Plaque revitalization at the waterworks - temporary, seasonal, restaurant. Municipal Athletic Hall - private residence, general business, cultural monument with a link to the catalog of the National Monuments Institute - abuse and many others. It is not possible to revoke it, it is also not possible to send a nomination again from the system. Going back to the place and making a nomination so that it is rejected for other bad reasons, no one is bored anymore. Improved nominations are rejected, for example, 2 hours after the start of the vote.
If you would use a guideline for the location of a large building meaning for example the entrance wouldn't it solve the problem of people try to change locations?
Please relese competition in Wayfarer about win CMU in Ingress Prime and Pokémon GO money in Pokémon GO. I think more like run Wayfarer when they can win CMU. Lots of old agents run Ingress from start stop with Wayfarer when they get the Wayfarer medal. We need something more after we complete the medal.
In order to reject / accept a new waypoint on Wayfairer, you need to pass a test. In order to submit via Ingress or Pokémon Go, you do not and you can tell who approves and who does not on the nomination as some that come through are poor, especially with comments such as ‘this area needs a stop’. I feel with a bit better education a number of players, who submitted their stop/portal in good faith could improve their nominations which benefits the whole community.
Can some sort of communication be put out to players of PoGo and Ingress through the apps (like we get when a new community day is happening) on good stop criteria and that in supporting information things that should be put in (e.g. what the cool backstory is, whether it’s listed building, how it may appear to be generic but it’s a local hyper spot in a rural community)
With the new way to move waypoints over 10m being via a web form, can Niantic find a way to respond to us to say whether it is or isn’t going to be moved once a decision is made rather than leaving us wondering.
Are you aware on nominations that are using third party applications while taking a photo in nominating a wayspot. This is the source of fake and abusive nominations in wayfarer. Most nominations here in our area are using third party applications in order to upload an edited photo or a screenshot in the main photo disc or in the supporting photo. Are u taking steps on how to get rid of these wayfinders using third party apps? Please take seriously into this because uploading of edited photos especially in the supporting photos are becoming prevalent. It is so frustrating that there are fake nominations that is live in Niantic games and it is really unacceptable.
What is planned to prevent those fake nominations before they get in review which have flooded the system recently?
Mostly there are two types of fakes.
Both of those cases should be easy to discover in an automated process. An AI could check if a picture is photoshopped and the accuracy of a location could be checked if a geotagged image is be mandatory.
In the UK along with abroad we have park runs, in normal times these occur weekly and encourage large groups of people to do a timed 5km run once a week. Recently they have started installing markers to direct runners around the route. These markers are a lot like trail markers, small plastic disks, named park run 5km, with an arrow guiding the runners along the route. So my question is, do these markers meet the criteria for acceptance? [FYI some are already live].
Pros; promotes fitness, and community gatherings, found in public parks.
Cons; quiet generic/common and a little bit underwhelming
Example of a marker, the green arrow in the picture below.
Link to already live park run portal
Good time of day. Please tell me, here I failed the test a year ago on https://wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/ once due to inexperience and the second time due to a buggy test. Here is me intereseno I 40 in pokemon go and here is already 13 in ingress, when I will be able pass still times poll so as I already experience gained!
I wonder if the ‘40 meter rule’ will ever be changed. As it is now, it is sometimes extremely hard to use. It is impossible to know wether, for an example, a two storey building, semi-detached is to be considered private property or not.
Also, since it is possible for us to move the submission spot, sometimes you can move it outside the 40 m radius and still have it right (athletic fields are big). However, not everyone does that.
The discrepancies in the way people review the rule leads to wildly different scores, and by that, everyone gets lower ratings in the end. The old rule (review closely, make sure it is not on private ground, and that it possible to get there without trespassing) was easy to use, and clear. Now, it just causes confusion.
Bonjour à tous
Ma question est simple depuis que j'ai discuté avec deux joueurs que je pensais être des amis toutes mes propositions de pokestop sont rejetées, je dis bien TOUTES. Des aires de jeux, des puits communaux, des panneaux de sentiers pédestre du conseil régional, tout est refusé, pour l'heure 13 propositions co decutives, alors qu'avant de discuter avec ces 2 personnes toutes mes propositions ont été validées
Donc voici ma question, comment signaler cet abus à Niantic et faire vérifier que des joueurs ne jugent pas en toute objectivité mais uniquement dans le but de s'opposer au plaisir de jouer des autres
Merci de vos réponses
I would like to know if the park plates, plates that inform the creation of tracks and sidewalks, the municipal plates go or not? Since I have understood that car plates do not go, and plates in tribute and educational information also go .. But I would like to know if those types of plates that I mentioned above are a good proposal to be accepted or rejected. Thanks in advance.
We need more transparency in our nominations.
The dates of moving into voting and when an upgrade was applied should show.
In addition the progress of the voting process should be displayed and updated daily.
It would be nice to get a message every once in a while with some stats regarding your approved nominations.
For example "The wayspots you have discovered were visited by 370 players in the past month!"
These can be more specific to the games the wayspots were submitted through like "250 trainers have visited the pokestops you have discovered !", "43 raids have taken place in gyms you have discovered!", "The portals you have discovered have been hacked 210 times in the past month!"
It can be a monthly/bimonthly email, with maybe some other important updates for Wayfarer.
Why is there still no way for Pokemon-exclusive players to see existing portals nearby while submitting? The volume of nominations I review that are duplicates of portals that didn't sync to Go is ridiculous. Go players have less nominations to begin with, so it seems unfair for them to waste their nominations on things that are already in the network, but not visible in their game. Not only does it waste a nomination it is possible that a nomination can fail to appear even in Ingress strictly because of a portal that is unseen to the submitter being within 20m of the pin while no visible stops are. Surely it would not be that difficult to add existing Wayspots to the pin placement map when nominating.
I have a question regarding nominations for large areas. If there is a signboard at the entrance, I think that there is no problem at that position. I don't know where to find the right place for a nomination with the title Square and no sign. If it is a plaza in the park, I think that it corresponds to ancillary facilities of the park, but I think that a place like a vast vacant lot is nominated like a plaza.
Like Community day in PoGo should we have Review Day in Wayfarer that bounus 1.5 aggriment (or something Else). That's encourage more people to review.I always do reviewing but I always thinking is possible we have any event of Wayfarer....I don't know is this possible or not. But I think it should help to lure those people who not reviewing.
Is there any chance you can clarify the term visual uniqueness please.
Some , myself included, say that having multiple instances of the same looking POI (usually trail markers) in a small area, means that they are not visually unique and should be rated sub 3*, personally if there are 5 or more of the same looking POI in a small are I would 1* them
Others say that visual uniqueness is only if a POI stands out of its nearby surroundings, it doesn't matter if their are identical POI's in the same small area, its visually unique to where it is located and so always score them 3* or above.
Please can you clarify which position is correct ?