Survey Markers
I'm not questioning the eligibility of survey markers, but am questioning how we're supposed to review them and verify that they are indeed real?
In the U.S., the USGS database is rather difficult to use and may take more time than Wayfarer allots to a review simply to verify the existence of a survey marker.
The reason I am asking is that I have been made aware of two questionable markers in my area, one that exists as a POI and another that has been purchased for installation. They appear to have been purchased from a site similar to https://mountainmonkeycompany.com/.
Best Answer
-
Kroutpiick-PGO Posts: 370 ✭✭✭✭
While I won't discuss eligibility here like OP said, I would think this :
The submitter has the "additionnal information" field to help you verify its existence, by providing URL to the database or other proof. If in 20 minutes, you are not able to find it in the USGS database, not able to see it in Street view or unable to match submission pictures with street view, and you doubt that it really exist : it's pretty much a case of 1* location.
Custom made (privately manufactured) or replica markers == not permanent/fake nomination == abuse.
Answers
I used to be a surveyor and survey markers are not for public use. I know some of the older survey markers are in middle of a road (dangerous). Some survey markers are under a protective plate. I personally wouldn't accept them myself.
Thanks, I'll leave the eligibility debate for a different thread. There's now-deprecated guidance from Niantic to consider these acceptable. I'm more concerned with how we're expected to verify them if that is indeed still the case. That concern comes from knowing of two privately manufactured and placed markers in my local area.
While I won't discuss eligibility here like OP said, I would think this :
The submitter has the "additionnal information" field to help you verify its existence, by providing URL to the database or other proof. If in 20 minutes, you are not able to find it in the USGS database, not able to see it in Street view or unable to match submission pictures with street view, and you doubt that it really exist : it's pretty much a case of 1* location.
Custom made (privately manufactured) or replica markers == not permanent/fake nomination == abuse.
I'm marking this as the answer but want to point out that Niantic has made it very difficult to get these fake Waypoints removed once they're in the database. Everyone needs to submit the way you describe and needs to review the way you describe for there to be any legitimacy to these existing as Wayspots. I don't think the community can manage that, so I'd really love to see updated guidance. I may start another thread on the eligibility topic in the future.
There's a recent thread about eligibility of geodetic/survey markers here :
Thanks, but again, the purpose of this was to discuss what evidence should be presented and how much verification is the responsibility of the reviewer versus the submitter. This is driven from seeing that they can easily be faked.
The numbers on the marker can be taken & matched up to what is listed in the database. It is overlaid on a map & you can basically figure out where the marker is just from overhead without using street view. I know they’re easily faked but I firmly believe these should definitely be accepted depending on the location & of course if they’re real or not.
The best recommendation I can give is for submitters to download & use the street view app & submit photospheres of the area surrounding these so reviewers can see these & prove if the marker is actually there or not quickly instead of checking on the database & wasting time trying to figure out the correct location because honestly if you can’t tell where they are, I agree, they shouldn’t be accepted
The issue is not with them being "fake" as in non-existent. The issue is with them being "fake" as in not genuine: Purchased from a company that makes custom markers and installed in concrete so as to give the appearance that they are genuine survey markers when they are in fact not genuine. The database would help but I am not sure there's really an interest from the broader Wayfarer community to go to the trouble of verifying proposed POI on a separate website.
I don’t recommend wayfarers to have to check the database because I agree it is a painstaking process. It’s a lot easier for the person who is submitting the geodetic survey marker, if it is historical to download street view if they want the nomination to be accepted & submit photospheres of the area surrounding the marker. Otherwise I completely agree with you. These are too hard to verify & should be denied. In the United States & especially in Indiana where I live, most of these that you will find that haven’t been removed are where they are because they are historical monuments themselves
So survey markers in a brand new estate, established during the creation of the estate, you would consider historical?
If you can prove that they have historical significance, then sure, submit them because if they are indeed notable they would stand on their own merit (like this one). But to put a blanket label of 'historical' on them all is entirely incorrect.
I’m not trying to be rude at all but I stated historical as in old. Not “new”. “Important to history”
In indiana we don’t have geodetic benchmarks that are new. Newer ones also don’t say old dates
I don’t recommend submitting them all. I recommend only submitting “old” ones that show the date & are accessible, not on the side of the road
I have submitted these & gotten them accepted, it all depends on the proof & if they are important to history & if they are accessible or not. If a photosphere of the area can prove these things. Why not submit them? And why not accept them?