Nomination rejected for false reason (natural thing for a wall)


please help me to improve this nomination for the next time (In 15Days -_-) it was rejected for a bad reason (a wall is not a natural thing ... -_- a wall is obviously an hand made thing and i explain that in description and in complementary information.

this wall is an historical wall of the village... so it perfectly meet niantic’s criteria.



  • Misch60-PGOMisch60-PGO Posts: 225 ✭✭✭

    The wall may be old, but I don't see the extra historical value. It's just a wall in my eyes. Something that is old is not always historic.

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 440 ✭✭✭

    I explain the historical value in description and additionnal information. ;) For someone who know the forest, it's easy to know what is important or not. I won't try to submit something not important.

    This wall is on a trail, it's historical, it's rare (many of the wall like this was destroyed by time or during the WW). It meet many Niantic's criteria. I took time to explain why it's a good submission.

    And despite that it was rejected for being a natural thing not made by man! (lol, i don't know the nature to be able to build walls)

    So i wonder what can i do to submit it again and have a better chance to see it accepted.

  • Kellerrys-INGKellerrys-ING Posts: 696 ✭✭✭✭✭

    First. If you want point of view also from people not fluent in French, copy paste your description and support text in your post so we can translate and understand it.

    Second. In my experience such "historical walls" require more than nominator's word to get accepted. In other words, outside source, for example local history site or cultural heritage area directory where reviewers can confirm your description/explanation.

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 440 ✭✭✭


    Vestige de l’une des nombreuses fermes présentes au 19ème siècle. Il ne reste aujourd’hui que des ruines comme ce mur, qui servait à supporter le terrain en pente pour favoriser les cultures. Très bien conservé il est en granite blanc des Vosges.

    Information complémentaire

    Élément du patrimoine local, témoin du passé, ce mur a l’avantage d’être bien conservé et situé à proximité d’un chemin bien connu des promeneurs. Parfaitement accessible aux piétons en toute période de l’année. Il est en outre très remarquable, ce qui en ferait un bon lieu d'intérêt (surtout dans ce secteur car illustrant bien le passé agricole du village).

    For the second point, we don't have any website to explain everything we can foud on the forest. Many information are only on the village magazine, so impossible to put a link on the description. (i could eventually scan it and put it online, but that won't give more information than what i wrote, and the quality of the scan (the magazine is just made with word) will be a problem.

    There is plenty of good place that can be a POI according to niantic's rules, but if reviewers want so many proof i don't see how it could be possible to get them in game... Especially in rural area.

  • Kellerrys-INGKellerrys-ING Posts: 696 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thank you for the text.

    Unfortunately, as an outsider it's hard to see the signifigance of the wall.

    It sounds like people in your village has had an intrerest in the local history (magazine). Would you/they have motivation to create history walk route / information boards from the already existing material?

    Information board next to the wall -> 4* or 5*.

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 440 ✭✭✭
    edited February 2021

    Thanks for the idea.

    Information board would certainly be usefull for many people. (not only for POI)

    Simple idea are sometimes good ideas ;)

  • LukeAllStars-INGLukeAllStars-ING Posts: 4,625 Ambassador

    I would agree with rejecting this wall. There is no provable history on it. I don't know how a wall can get eligible, only because I existed while the WWs. If the wall is on a trail, this won't make it eligible to me. It's still a wall, which doesn't meet criteria in my eyes.

    If you got a sign, submit the sign. But don't submit walls.

    If you got any proof via weblinks you might have a chance, but I still see all the fast clickers rejecting it. But in the end, everybody can say that "This stone has a historical value", which is irrelevant without further evidence.

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 440 ✭✭✭

    I don't agree with that: complementory information is here to explain why something is important.

    I natural area, we can't submit natural thing as a POI (witch i think is stupid) so man-made things like a wall are the only thing we can submit.

    It's already difficult to submit trail markers despite Niantic said that's OK because some people thougt there was generic. An old wall on a forest, even without history (witch is not the case here) is a good POI (forest is a good place to exercice AND a wall is a man-made thing witch is not generic)

    If people want sign for every submission, it will be difficult to submit many POI in rural area. -_-

  • Misch60-PGOMisch60-PGO Posts: 225 ✭✭✭

    The thing is, there are many walls that are part of some old structure. However, they don't necessarily have any extra historical or cultural value, besides just existing there. If there is a story behind the structure that was, or educational purpose for example, it would be a great spot. But as this just seems like an old wall, that does not make it historical.

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 440 ✭✭✭

    Il agree with that and that’s why i explain in description and additionnal information why this old wall is important. And despite that it was rejected because some people thought i was not built by man and it’s natural feature. (Witch is obviously not)

    if people don’t read description when vote, all the wayfarer system is broken because i don’t see how improve nomination to have it validated the next time despite it fit niantic’s rules. (Without create an artificial sign (and i don’t aprouve that))

    i would be great if niantic find a system to appel when nomination is rejected by mistake like that.

  • Misch60-PGOMisch60-PGO Posts: 225 ✭✭✭

    The rejection reason can indeed be incorrect, but it is not the only rejection reason given. Even if 1 person gives that reason, it will show up in the email. Soo, I would just disregard that reason, and look at the others, which also say it would not pass the criteria according to the reviewers.

  • Kellerrys-INGKellerrys-ING Posts: 696 ✭✭✭✭✭

    One reviewer may have selected wrong rejection reason. That's not unusual, it happens.

    The propable reason your nomination was not approved is that majority of the reviewers didn't think your nomination (aka wall) was important or significant enough to be a Waypoint.

    That doesn't even necessarily mean they didn't read your text. They could have just disagreed. Even after reading your description and support text, I would have rejected this.

    In short. This is not as good a POI as you seem to think.


    And yes, the current situation/criteria is often irritating for rural areas.

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 440 ✭✭✭

    It's the only reason given in the mail.

    It's ok with theses criteria:

    • Forêts
    • Sentiers de randonnée

    and "quelque chose qui raconte l'histoire unique d'un lieu"

    It's ok with all acceptation criteria (one eligibility criteria, permanent and indentifiable, without any danger and correct description and have no reject criteria.

    I chose carefully what i suggest as a new POI because with only 7 chance every 15 days, it would be better if there is no rejection, so i check all criteria for anything i suggest. Because there is no many POI in my village (only 6 for now) despite the fact there are so many interesting thing here (like this historical wall). It will took more than a year with 7 suggestion per 15 days to suggest everything, but i don't want to lose my time... If suggestion are reject with false reason despite a long description and some research for me, it's juste bad.

    The fact here that it was rejected for a false reason. Bad reviewer made me lost one proposition for that. I just would like to know how to improve this submission to not get a new rejection for a false reason the next time i suggest it. If it's not good, ok, but in this cas explain why a remarquable historical wall like this, in an area without any POI should be rejected. (and don't say to me it's a natural wall)

  • Kellerrys-INGKellerrys-ING Posts: 696 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It's the only reason given in the mail.

    "La proposition ne repond pas aux criteres de validation."

    This is the first rejection reason in your email. Even I know enough French to understand the meaning.

  • HannesTheHammer-PGOHannesTheHammer-PGO Posts: 97 ✭✭✭

    I can understand being upset, but your assessment is incorrect over here. In your rejection mail the following reasons are given:

    • doesn't fulfill the criteria
    • natural feature--> I assume because the wall is completely overgrown, which is understandable
  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 440 ✭✭✭

    But the wall is NOT a natural feature... It can't be considered as a natural feature juste because some moss grown on it. So it's a false reason.

    And i just explain why it's fullfill the criteria.

    I don't post here to have the same explanation as the false one given in the mail.

    I post here to improve the nomination and get some advice to avoid false rejection like this because these kind of rejection generate a big lost of time.

  • FrealafGB-PGOFrealafGB-PGO Posts: 354 ✭✭✭✭

    If you have a year's worth of other options to nominate, I would definitely submit some of those before this wall.

    It may have some interesting history, however reviewers really love a sign, and without one, you'll struggle to get it approved.

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 440 ✭✭✭

    Ok, i will certainly do that, and waiting for a sign (the municipal concil want to promote historical thing on the village, so maybe they will install something... one day, or maybe someone else will install a sign too)

    Thank you

  • FrealafGB-PGOFrealafGB-PGO Posts: 354 ✭✭✭✭

    Yeah if the council put a sign on it as part of a history trail or something, I think you'll get it approved no problem! Without, probably quite unlikely, even though that sounds really unfair, its just the way things seem to work.

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

    Without a sign or similar information, it's just "another wall". 1* - The object is mass-produced, generic, or not visually unique or interesting,

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 440 ✭✭✭

    Mass producted? This wall? Seriously? It’s crazy to think that.

    and « generic » is no longer a rejection criteria according to niantic since november.

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 440 ✭✭✭

    Indeed that’s very unfair and i hope Niantic will take a look at that’s kind of situation because we will miss many good POI especially in campaign if people refused that’s kind of very good submission

  • Misch60-PGOMisch60-PGO Posts: 225 ✭✭✭

    He is not saying the wall is mass-produced, but it's part of that rejection reason. The reason he would see it, would be as "not visually interesting enough". But as mass-produced is part of that whole reason, it's mentioned.

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 440 ✭✭✭

    Maybe i don't understand all the subtilities of the english language, but i'm pretty sure this kind of wall is not generic or mass producted. It's visually unique in my village (maybe we could found one of two wall like that on the entire forest aroud the village but after a long search)

    I really don't understand how someone can say this wall is not interressant after reading the description.

    But ok, i will wait for the installation of a sign by the village to submit it again.

  • TheFarix-PGOTheFarix-PGO Posts: 5,063 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If it is historically significant, then that would be documented somewhere. However, without presenting that documentation in the nomination, it is just a random stone wall covered in moss indistinguishable from millions of others like it.

  • Aeryle88-PGOAeryle88-PGO Posts: 440 ✭✭✭

    Ok. It's documented only on phycial documents at the city hall (sorry not sur if we say that in english)

    I will try to see if that could be puplished online, of if the village planned to create a sign to explain historical meaning of the wall.

  • Jtronmoore-PGOJtronmoore-PGO Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Yeah without any documents this will be rejected over and over as its just a rock wall lol

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

    "Generic" in the Niantic criteria is used in the board sense - "Generic" = similar / identical to lots of other things. This stone wall looks very similar to a lot of other stone walls, if you swapped the pictures around you could probably replace the photo of one wall with another because they are all so imilar. There is nothing significantly "different" about the appearance of this stone wall compared to all the others, no one is going to say "Wow - look how different THAT wall is compared to the rest".

    Regarding the use of the word "generic", it is still part of the "Does not meet eligibility criteria" reasoning on the Rejection Criteria page of the Wayfarer system. This should not be read as a single statement that is applied to a submission but rather as a list of reasons why the Waypoint is not acceptable.

    Does not meet eligibility criteria

    Does not seem to be a great place of exploration, place for exercise, or place to be social. The object is mass-produced, generic, or not visually unique or interesting.

    This should be read as "Does not seem to be a great place of exploration OR place for exercise OR a place to be social. The object is mass-produced OR generic OR not visually unique OR interesting.

Sign In or Register to comment.