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: https://niantic.helpshift.com/a/wayfarer/
Answers
@oscarc1-ING NIantic has always been pro unique architecture.
"Cool pieces of art or unique architecture"
A bridge is a unique piece of architecture in a park or on a trail.
As long as the bridge is for foot traffic then yes it qualifies.
@Gabriel0322-PGO I don't see a problem. Both above are approved.
That first one is definitely unique I'd say and worth the nomination.
"Visually Unique" does not mean "it's the only bridge in the park", it needs to be visually interesting.
More than 5 pieces of wood nailed together for example, something that is identical to 100 000 bridges in other parks.
@PoMaQue-PGO i completely agree, I see many basic bridges submitted. If someone submits an interesting one then I would rate it highly. I still would like to see some examples from Niantic that they think meets the bridges criteria because the AMA answer was a bit open-ended and people are using it to submit any bridge
Per me e fantastici mi auguro che te lo accettino
This. It would be so beneficial to see photo examples of what Niantic are looking for. Most of us just want to review to Niantic's guidelines, and these discussions happen when Niantic aren't clear enough about their guidelines :(
The bridge question refers specifically to "wooden walking trail bridges". A footbridge is not a wooden walking trail bridge.
Well, that's how the question was asked. The answer says nothing about the material of the bridge, just that it has to be part of a trail. And that's why we need better clarification.
What is the end result of different materials? A bridge is still a bridge. If the bridge is used part of a trail and is accessible by foot, it meets criteria.
October 2019 actual language in Wayfarer:
What about wooden walking trail bridges throughout a park or nature preserve on the trail/path? If they are accessible by foot and expected to be used as part of the trail, they would meet the criteria.
Dictionary
foot·bridge /ˈfo͝otˌbrij/
noun
If you read that AMA properly, you would see that it specifically stated "wooden walking trail bridges", not footbridges, so your comment really doesn't do much except try derail another thread.
@PoMaQue-PGO Your explanation of "Visually Unique" differs from my understanding. Wayfarer Help says "Visual Uniqueness: Does the nomination stand out from its surroundings? Wayspots that are easy to locate and visually distinct from the buildings and objects nearby make high-quality Wayspots and should be rated highly. If you think the nomination looks bland and will be hard to locate, give it a lower rating."
In my opinion, almost any footbridge gets a decent score on visually unique. You are not going to miss seeing a footbridge on any kind of trail or path. I do rate lower for bridges that are simpler and more bland, but unless you are on a trail with one footbridge after another, even the most boring bridge is distinct and visually unique.
As follow on to this comment, when rating the "visual uniqueness" if a wayspot, it also states that a visually unique wayspot should not be common in the area.
So, an example, pubs, old churches, etc might score lower on that rating whereas a statue of someone famous (I.E. Queen Victoria) or a war memorial would score higher since they're more likely to be the only one of their kind in that area.
So, whereas a footbridge or a wooden walking trail bridge might not be visually unique on a regional, national, or even an international level, they would be more likely to be visually unique on a local level or based on other existing wayspots that are shown in the "check for duplicates" section.
A structure at a park or trail that is a bridge should be acceptable if it has pedestrian access to the wayspot. If it is on it or under it both should still be acceptable. The structure is what is identifiable.
Structures are Architecture for various places.
Any pedestrian bridge seems eligible to me. It's interesting, usually, and encourages exercise by supporting travel from one area to another.
I can't find it in the AMAs, so I think it was posted in the Ingress community at some point, but "visually unique" doesn't actually mean what you're saying it means. It doesn't mean "there are a lot of these, so they aren't unique". Rather, you should rate candidates on visual uniqueness on if they can be easily found, located, and distinguished from their surroundings. So, you might have a church that you say "looks similar to all of the other churches, so that's low visual uniqueness", but that's the wrong way to look at it. Rather, you should be asking "can I tell that this building is obviously a church and distinguishable from it's surroundings?'. You know the wayspot is a church, and when going there you see a church and you know that the church you see and the wayspot in the game are the same thing. It doesn't matter that the church looks like a church -- you know that the church is a church, and it is easy to pick out from its surroundings. That's visually unique.
Now, they are related. If you have 8 baseball fields in a park, it might be hard to identify them individually. But if you have "Town Park Baseball Field" as your wayspot, and there's only one of them, you know exactly what that wayspot is and what real world location it represents. It's not low visual uniqueness because all baseball fields look similar, but rather actually high uniqueness because it's easy to tell which real world location is represented by the wayspot.
The same thing goes for playgrounds. If you go to a park and somebody tells you to find the playground, and there's only one playground, and you can easily find it, that's high visual uniqueness, not a low visual uniqueness because most playgrounds have the same types of equipment that other playgrounds have. Also, it would be the same thing for any such candidate, bridges included.
I didn't mean the rating option during reviewing, but the overal visual aspect of the bridge.
For example we have plenty of utility boxes, who are not eligible on their own. But then the town decided to decorate them with old pictures or other art, which make them stand out from other utility boxes all around. So they get a rating based on how unique the overall look is.
I have never had issues with that review option, because indeed you can't really miss a bridge. But the guidelines say it must be part of a trail, whether it's in a park or not. It doesn't simply say "if a bridge is in a park, it's eligible".
But if I would see the bridge as having value on its own (i.e. uniquely built), I would rate it higher.
I see so many people here insisting that something has to have a sign, yet I've seen nearly a dozen eligible signs rejected in our local area in the past two days. Inherently, the sign requirement is for validation of the object's existence. If it doesn't have a sign and you can validate through other evidence that it exists, your rejection of the nomination is the abuse of Wayfarer.
I feel like they need people to be able to differentiate between a walkway and a recreational trail.
Where you find about the criteria? Wayfarer or ingress/Pokémon GO page?
If you are asking where he found this, it's on Wayfarer: https://wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/help#niantic-wayfarer-clarifications-october-2019
If you haven't seen this page, be sure to check it out, same as the January 2020 clarifications.
Short answer is if a bridge in a park is part of a trail route it then becomes a valid wayspot because it's part of a trail.
Just a few uptades on help and some samples will be great... And we need to talk with all community to follow the new clarifications... I did in my city, but its not easy... With an offical help will be much more easier....
I agree, needs examples of what Niantic believe meets the criteria and examples of what they think doesn’t meet criteria
I’d say that bridges in parks are definitely acceptable and not required to be part of a trail as, in my opinion, they’d qualify under the criteria (found in the wayfarer January 2020 clarifications)
Parks and items within Parks (signs, gazebos, chess boards, fountains, sculptures, etc.)