Can we add a note to nominating items within zoos?
Hi, I think we should add a note for nominating items in zoos, about not nominating every single animal pen as a separate POI.
While the sign may be educational, when it's in a zoo, it will be placed everywhere and will have no significance.
This would be applying the same logic as playgrounds, where you nominate the location as a whole and not every single equipment.
Zoos should be 1 POI for the location and allow other items as additional points (i.e. unique decoration, playground, ...). If someone nominated a specific animal enclosure/sign, it would need to have some significance. (i.e. "Largest gorilla habitat in Europe").
Any thoughts?
Best Answer
-
Gendgi-PGO Posts: 3,534 Ambassador
I can see where you're coming from, but think I don't agree with the conclusion. If there is informational signage for each pen, it each should be eligible. Many of the animal habitats are attractions themselves and typically have several information plaque. Maybe one POI per habitat, but it would be a harsh limitation to say a zoo could only have 1 POI.
I think your playground comparison would be more applicable for sports/athletic fields. If they are all unique and have signage, they would all be eligible.
Answers
Difatti dovrebbe gia essere cosi ma non tutti lo sanno , puoi dare il tuo contributo ,apportando tu stesso le aggiunte e o modifiche questo aiuta a migliorare di molto il gioco ciao
I can see where you're coming from, but think I don't agree with the conclusion. If there is informational signage for each pen, it each should be eligible. Many of the animal habitats are attractions themselves and typically have several information plaque. Maybe one POI per habitat, but it would be a harsh limitation to say a zoo could only have 1 POI.
I think your playground comparison would be more applicable for sports/athletic fields. If they are all unique and have signage, they would all be eligible.
I'm with Gendgi on this one. Each exhibit usually has information on each species. A zoo will usually be large in size so you'll be doing a lot of walking from one exhibit to the other. Exhibits as wayspots in zoos helps players pay attention to the animal, exersize, explore the zoo, and learn.
I'd say 1 per habitat too, 1 per zoo wouldnt work as zoos are big areas, bigger than almost any oaek you would find multiple times over. If you wanted do one poi per animal type, such ad 1 for big cats, 1 for monkeys/apes
100% this.
Each habitat signage is unique and encourages exploration and adventure. It almost makes a virtual AR map of the zoo and encourages people to go see each one. Like a scavenger hunt, it only enhances some people’s experience at the zoo.
I always thought it was overkill, but if everybody feels that way, hold on while I spend 50 nominations on my next visit to the local zoo.
I've got an annual subscription so won't be any difficulty (once current restrictions are lifted) :D
On the topic of sports fields, my understanding was always "1 POI per sports type" (1 for football, 1 for basketball, ...) multiple fields for the same sport = 1 POI
All of this.
One wayspot per habitat makes more sense. One wayspot per zoo is too restrictive, especially if the habitats are different.
Like a wayspot for a tiger enclosure, a wayspot for a penguin enclosure, and a wayspot for a giraffe enclosure would still be unique compared to submitting a wayspot for each entrance of a park.
I hope I get to review all 50! As long as they are well done, I see little problem with them passing. That said, I've reviewed nominations for a local zoo where satellite view is inadequate and no photospheres exist, so make sure you check first and/or make good use of supporting imagery. Focus on plaques or information signs for your nominations and avoid photos focusing on the enclosure itself or animals. A directory or zoo map may even pass. As you mentioned, playgrounds and unique sculpture/art could be eligible, along with pavilions and other gathering locations. You mentioned having an annual pass, so try to avoid seasonal displays that may be temporary - not that they might not pass, but if it changes from year to year that's going to make "clean-up" more difficult next year.
On the topic of sports fields, my understanding was always "1 POI per sports type" (1 for football, 1 for basketball, ...) multiple fields for the same sport = 1 POI
This has not really been clearly elaborated enough in my opinion. It isn't uncommon to have each baseball field within a sports complex to receive a nomination and pass, however it also isn't uncommon for them to get falsely rejected for low visual uniqueness or cultural/historical value. I don't think multiple generic basketball courts within one enclosure should be eligible, but visually unique, separated, distinctly named, or somehow culturally significant could make them more eligible. Baseball fields are usually self-enclosed and offer the most distinction from field to field, whereas tennis courts usually (not always) have multiple per single enclosure.
Yeah the zoo is largely obstructed by trees, I already made successful nominations there, PhotoSphere all the way.
My biggest frustration at the moment, is that I see people abused submissions or edits in the past and had things go live about 100m from where they actually are. I tried to submit a location Edit, but cannot see the the actual location because of the trees. And using the option to center on my location doesn't work, because I'm too far from the POI I want to edit (keeps bringing me back).
It may not necessarily be "abuse" if satellite view is that bad, and Redacted used to have had GPS mismatch if you weren't careful. Thankfully, edits seem to be going through faster for most areas. Hopefully you're able to get on location, soon, and get things straightened out over there. Don't forget you can appeal failed edits on here, too.
Redacted was a nightmare for getting the location correct. A few of my Redacted subs had to get the location edit treatment because they weren't near enough to the nominated wayspots.
Also, agreed that it's not necessarily abuse if the satellite view is really bad, and definitely not abuse if they were Redacted submissions.
That's the thing, I cannot submit a loction edit through Pokémon Go, because the actual location is too far from the in-game one.
I'm not talking about 10m here, but at least 100m + the one moved is in real life close to another existing POI. So my guess is still abuse to get 2 POI's in instead of 1.
It may take a series of edits, then, or if you have one failed then appeal it and provide the actual location in
A friend of mine and I went to a zoo together. It was the second day since opening. A whole clean slate, zero waypoints (except with two in the queue, by another local who had two things near the entrance submitted and in the queue). It was a smorgasbord of portals ready to be submitted.
Working only with satellite view and a zoo map, we marked all the signs and information boards unto the map brochure and carefully planned out our submissions. Then we spent a whole chunk of time going through all the submissions that we saved, and going through the process.
Three months later, all but one of the submissions were approved, and the zoo is feeling wholesome and ready an awesome day out! The zoo is all unclaimed and absolutely ready for the taking, but of course after this Corona crisis.
Mind the fact that the supporting photo often looked like this (one of us holding open the map and the other pointing out the location with the object or place in the background). Satellite view made the process very easy with the zoo path outlines very visible, leading to almost razor accuracy and a zoo with great photos and an AR experience both us and the zoo would be proud of. Note that there is only one photosphere (which is at the front of the zoo), so we're both grateful for the all the reviewers who helped make this zoo a great place to play.
A Zoo is a beautiful place to get out to explore/learn, I would 5 star multiple nominations there easily
-Trinidad
Well I just had a playground in the zoo being turned down because "Not historically or culturally significant" as the only rejection reason. 😶
(Was submitted before they needed to close.)
That's a bad rejection. Check out Casey's post and share a screenshot of your rejection email over here.
Sorry that one got denied. Bad rejections definitely put a damper on the process
@PoMaQue-PGO it appears new reviewers dontbunderstand the historical/cultural and unique look bit, they will 1 star things (they know are overall good) in those areas because they dont feel they fill those areas because they dont realise it can be rejected for that rather than it just affecting the overall score
There are Pokemon Go youtube videos like this one by LuckyBuns https://youtu.be/nGM___dNN8M that introduced trainers to the wayfarer system that teach that putting 1 star for those categories is the right thing to do for basically all playgrounds.
One of these days people will learn not to trust what half of these youtube videos tell you (hopefully).
To be honest, I always thought "Cultural" meant "in relation to art". It was only recently that I read that any gathering place should get cultural points.
But it's also only been very recently that I saw this pop up as common reason for rejections (didn't see it mentioned anywhere for 5 months, now every sports field and playground seems to get it.
But if everyone starts putting thumbs down on that video and explain why it's incorrect, maybe it'll help?