Nomination Rejected for unrelated criteria, because the reviewers didn't read...
Title: Bancas de Jardín Cafetales
Location: 28.71801,-106.147645
City: Chihuahua
Country: Chihuahua
Reject Screenshoot
Image with the park benches
The nomination was rejected under "Natural Feature" criteria, the title of the nomination is "Bancas de Jardin Cafetales", the translation of that is something like "Park seats of Coffee Plantantions Gardens", there "Cafetales"or "Coffee Plantations" is the name of the neiboorhood, "Jardin Cafetales" is the name of the park, so.. well "Bancas" is a Park seat, in the second image i show the seats sorrounded by red, that are Concrete park seats, so... why is my nomination rejected under "Natural Feature" criteria?? The thing here is that i waste an upgrade for this nomination and i feel very unfair to loose the upgrade because the ppl didnt evaluate the nomination seriously, and the rejection criteria is ridiculous, basically the whole nomination makes reference to something that is not a "Nature Feature".
Comments
Yes, you got a wrong rejection. But is that park has any name sign?
Park benches may get rejected as being generic/mass-produced objects.
It would help to submit a name sign.
Similar discussion here :
Yes but is in another section of the park, this is more like the rest area of the park, maybe i should change the title to something like that
I am sorry you lost an upgrade, though had I reviewed, would reject under photo quality for the car license plates being in the photo. If you resubmit, try another angle.
I don't think that the plates are actually readable but at least that would be a reasonable criteria, not "Natural Feature", but yes i'll try another picture, thx for the suggestion!
Ok, one of the rejection is wrong. What about the part where other people has selected that it doesn't meet the approval criteria?
Under which criteria should those benches be approved?
Well is the rest area of that park, there are thousands of pokestops or portals of that kind of places at least in my city, it fits under "Great Place to be social with others" criteria, in the description of the nomination i talk about that section of the park works as rest area, in the other side there are soccer and basket fields, lots of ppl walks and rest on that park. I understand the question but the thing here is the rejection under ridiculos criteria, i understand arguments like @AZMagikarpie-PGO did, that was a valid argument to reject this nomination by example.
If there are soccer and basketball fields, Why don't you nominate those first?
Those are high quality candidates, but as you can see people don't think the same about a group of benches.
There are a pokestop already in that part of the park, but actually yes, maybe i should. I felt that a pokestop in another area would be more appreciated and useful.
But again this post is not about el validity of the nomination itself, yes there are criteria to reject, and criteria to accept, maybe you think "Is just a group of benches, thats not enought to be a pokestop", or maybe another people see the picture and thinks "There is a car plate, it doesnt fit whit the criteria", i think that is a great place to be social and it should be a pokestop, all of them are valid arguments, the complain here is that this nomination is not a "Natural Feature", and that was the final resolution, that in my opinion is wrong
Appeal Denied - Thanks for the appeal, Trainer. We're not currently reviewing Pokéstop/Gym candidates. Please resubmit the nomination by improving its title/description if you feel that it was a valid nomination.
I am begging you, please end all your correspondences on this forum with "Smell ya later!"
The problem is that too many people judge it who don't understand the (non-English) native language used in the title and description. I already gave up on submitting stops.