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:

What is considered safe pedestrian access?

I am getting a little frustrated with some of my nominations being rejected lately and I want to improve the process in which I submit them. I live in a small, Northern town in Canada; we admittedly don't have a lot of sidewalk space here, outside of our downtown core.

I am just trying to figure out what is and isn't eligible for "Safe pedestrian access", as I seem to be receiving mixed reviews from reviewers and from Niantic themselves. I have seen it stated that a sidewalk or trail is required (1), for safe access. I have also seen it stated that safe access is defined as safely accessible by foot (2). By Niantic's very definition, parks or grassy areas without sidewalks or trails or waypoints inside buildings wouldn't qualify under (1), but would qualify under (2) .Unfortunately, I have gotten 3 ineligible reviews in the last 2 weeks based on not having safe pedestrian access, simply because there was no sidewalk going to that public building (with a proposed waypoint inside of it) and/or grassy area (which I do not believe is in the spirit of this criteria - correct me if I'm wrong).

We have a number of areas in our town and the surroundings that have open green spaces (grassy areas) that fit (2), but would not meet under criteria (1), because of a lack of defined trails and/or sidewalks going to these areas. These areas have signs, playgrounds, parks, etc inside of them. Some have been approved in the past, others not.

Anyways, I am just trying to get a better sense of what the community thinks about this, so I can better prepare my nominations in the future. Thank you.



  • Gazzas89-PGOGazzas89-PGO Posts: 2,525 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Some people dont really understand it, they seem to think you need a pavement or trail to ge tto it, I've seen things rejected because they were on the grass in a park for pedestrian access. My only hint is to submit again and explain that here is actually safe access, safe access is basically to avoid things in the middle of the road, In the middle of a lake or down a massive ditch etc.

  • Gendgi-PGOGendgi-PGO Posts: 3,423 Ambassador

    I think I agree with most of what @gazzas89-PGO already stated. Something in a park area doesn't need pedestrian access, but a sign that is located at the entrance along the road might be rejected for safe access, even if there is adequate space to congregate behind the sign (not saying it should be or shouldn't be rejected, just that it might be).

    A store or business "by definition" would have pedestrian access, but again some might reject a storefront if there is no standing/walking path in front.

    If you have any specifics you can share, especially photos, that might help the discussion, @ArcticPir4te-PGO. As always good luck!

  • Hydracyan-INGHydracyan-ING Posts: 130 ✭✭✭

    If you can access it without the risk of dying, them is valid for me. This rule is basically to prevent wayspots on dangerous sites, like in the midle of roudabouts (some have statues but no oficial pedestrian access to it), or inside powerplants, bridges, etc.

  • Thanks for the clarification. I will resubmit them and hopefully be able to get some of them approved now. Is there an official Niantic page or anything that I can link that spells this out in writing? Just so people aren't misleaded by the lack of sidewalks and/or trails?

  • Dice3423-INGDice3423-ING Posts: 817 ✭✭✭✭

    This is a official Niantic Page. I suggest using this page url in your supporting statement. (Not description.)

  • Gendgi-PGOGendgi-PGO Posts: 3,423 Ambassador

    I would NOT advise linking to this thread. Even though it is a Niantic facilitated & moderated forum, misinformation spreads. Personally, I encourage against adding links to supporting statements as 1) some people falsely reject even supporting info weblinks and 2) Niantic has indicated links in supporting statements may create false abuse flags.

    Use the supporting photo and text to explain as clearly as you can why you think your nomination meets criteria and is safely reachable. Similarly, review with the same thought. There are many other resources available, as well, that can provide faster responses than this forum. Hope this is helpful, @ArcticPir4te-PGO!

  • Gendgi-PGOGendgi-PGO Posts: 3,423 Ambassador


    When nominating new candidates, avoid using URLs, emojis, or game-specific terms (will be great as a gym etc.) in the title/description/supporting text. This will help you avoid delays and save your Upgrades for eligible candidates. 

    Please, let others discuss and stop your need for your last word. Thanks!

  • YouLostAStar-INGYouLostAStar-ING Posts: 280 ✭✭✭✭✭

    In terms of linking here it’s probably only worth linking to a direct Niantic reply as that is the “official guidance”

    for safe access I try to imagine the area being in an early 90s computer game, if you could access it safely with those constraints then it’s fine

  • Rostwold-INGRostwold-ING Posts: 172 ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2020

    This is an area that Niantic could be a lot clearer about, the lack of guidance means we have to make up our own rules.

    Personally, I 5* if there's a path, 4* if people could walk up and touch the thing but there's no path, and 1* if I think that 20 people gathering there for an Ex-raid would be dangerous. I can't recall ever using 2* or 3* though.

    Post edited by Rostwold-ING on
  • WheelTrekker-INGWheelTrekker-ING Posts: 3,281 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Yes, the forums are hijacked posting multiple messages in a row, asking about digital signs in a topic about information boards inside supermarkets and then arguing with no end because you just want a way to somehow be able to say that whatever you think at any moment is right.

    If Niantic reviews the forums and I can still see all those posts then the situation is quite worse than I expected, it's not that they are not aware of the problems, it's that they have decided to ignore the problem, so the obvious end to all of this is that this forums won't be worth absolutely nothing if just one person can act in such a way to dishearten any newcomer that have simple doubts or want to participate here.

  • AgentB0ss-INGAgentB0ss-ING Posts: 555 ✭✭✭✭✭

    People are not disagreeing with the criteria. We are disagreeing with you. You either twist the criteria, cite criteria that doesnt even relate to the topic. Or when people provide you criteria you outright ignore it and try to claim it means something else. So stop trying to play innocent here. You purposely abuse the system then don't understand why your 2 accounts have the MOST disagrees on the forums and all your likes and insightful are your own accounts.

  • AgentB0ss-INGAgentB0ss-ING Posts: 555 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Please, show me where I have proven I don't know the criteria?

    I have't flagged you very much, certainly less times than you've flagged me. I don't have a vendetta against you, I dislike when people twist the guidelines for their own selfish reasons and make posts to purposely mislead people. If you could follow the guidelines and stop trying to abuse the guidelines I wouldnt mind. EVEN when people try to help you, you turn on them and accuse them of things or flat out are rude to them. You purposely ignore the actual wording of the guidelines, cherry picking specific words and parts of guidelines you like.

  • AgentB0ss-INGAgentB0ss-ING Posts: 555 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Don't you see I reply to plenty of other posts on here that are not you. I respond to every question I believe I can help with, I correct others when they mistake the guidelines.

    The guidelines for recognizable faces and recognizable licenses plates has never changed. They flat out are not allowed in a Submission photo. They may be visible in a supporting photo as those photos are not retained and published to the waypoint.

    Pointing out your continued lies and twisting of the guidelines is not breaking the community guidelines. Again you havent proven I have broken the wayfarer guidelines or community guidelines.

  • AgentB0ss-INGAgentB0ss-ING Posts: 555 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2020

    Actually buddy, you are wrong. RB stands for Riverbend Trail, plus it has it has the Thread Trail Logo as its part of one of the recognized trails included in the thread trail system covering 2 states and 15 counties. So please try again :)

    Edit: And personally I will argue all day long that a recognized trail logo is better than a name on a trail marker. As it represents the name and so much more. This is a very special trail system that allows you to literally follow recognized trails through 15 counties all interconnected.

  • AgentB0ss-INGAgentB0ss-ING Posts: 555 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Yes it even clarifies that simple is just a trail with a number, yet this has more than a number, a CITY Logo, a Trail Logo, the distance, and the abbreviated name.

    Also I see you trying to attack me and ask how many I have purposed approved. Well as far as submissions go this is the only part of the trail system in my area with trail markers. Each of the pieces of the thread trail are uniquely named and have different levels of signage. One of the other trails in my area doesn't have mile markers at all.

  • Gendgi-PGOGendgi-PGO Posts: 3,423 Ambassador

    @Gabriel0322-PGO why are you stretching so far to derail this conversation?

    Here is a thread started about what counts as safe pedestrian access, and you've gone to attacking @AgentB0ss-ING yet again. I thought you'd blocked him? That was the quietest 2 minutes I've ever seen from you.

    Unless you have insight for the topic of conversation, posts deviating from safe access are being flagged as spam.

    Yet another thread that will likely get closed, soon.

  • Gendgi-PGOGendgi-PGO Posts: 3,423 Ambassador

    It doesn't matter who started or how it started, @Gabriel0322-PGO, and those posts appear in good faith pointing out misinformation that occurs.

    Please remind me what any of your last 5 posts have to do with safe pedestrian access?

  • PsychoX23-INGPsychoX23-ING Posts: 25 ✭✭

    According to a lot of rejections I've received, being inside a building doesn't count as safe pedestrian access, so I don't know how to answer this lol.

This discussion has been closed.