Hello, there’s a gym in my area that is a water tank that is contained in a barbed wire fences, with the entrance gate locked. While you can technically drive or walk to the periphery of this gate to access the gym, my friends and I feel that the gym is not really available for public access, as we cannot enter the building itself.
Does this fit the requirement to report for gym removal? Or not enough?
Gym detail : Water Tank in Faculty of Veterinary Medicine (2.975980, 101.710299)
We don’t know exactly what constitutes removal criteria, but NianticAaron has said that we can report anything we believe to be ineligible.
I can’t predict the decision, but if you feel this does not have safe pedestrian access, even from people allowed to be there, then you can try reporting it.
Edit: just realized his comment doesn’t show in that preview. Here is a direct quote
Not every wayspot has to be accessible to every player. Wayspots can be in gated communities, private businesses, places that require paid entry etc.
This probably doesn’t meet removal criteria. It exists, is safely accessible to people allowed to be there, does not affect emergency services and is not obviously ineligible.
Looking at the photo, I cannot see how it is unsafe for authorised people to access it (it has a stairway), since it is not at risk of falling down or anything like that
there is not one single thread. you can google as well as i can. discussions have been had on other platforms, too. just having the ability to enter behind the barbed wire does not make it a safe place for employees to be walking around.
(edited to add that it doesn’t make it unsafe either. each is a case by case decision.)
I think the entrance point is not unreasonable for the pin.
There are what I assume to be older pictures ( although it might be the reverse) which show no fencing present.
Hmm this is exactly the dilemma we’re having. Whether it’s considered “unsafe” enough to be removed. I would also like to add that with the fencing being added (apparently recently) the road immediately next and around the fencing do not have safe pedestrian-specified access. While it is not the busiest road for cars, somehow it still feel like a hazard for players to gather? I’m thinking submitting a picture taken further where the surrounding is more visible might pose a better chance.
To answer your question yes this picture is definitely older as the picture I posted was just taken last Monday (attached pic showing timestamp of picture taken)
Would your stance on it being a safe access change with the added info that the roads beside it are for cars and parking, and there’s not really a space for players to gather /stand around safely? Unfortunately I do not have a picture of it from a distance but I can definitely get one
I wish I could tell you exactly how Niantic will see this, but I can’t. If you feel there is a safety concern, all you can do is report it. They may decide to do nothing, but they won’t know about it if you don’t let them know.
No worries! Just asking the forum to see if other people have any tips/similar experiences. I’ve heard that most requests require multiple requests before it is approved, so will definitely start requesting and see if it’s accepted. Appreciate the replies!
We are fellow community members so these are simply our views on this specific scenario.
That there are a range of interpretations is normal.
If you do decide to report it and the request is declined, you can appeal the decision here Wayspot Appeals. Do ensure you have good photographic evidence of the area as the area is not on streetview.
I don’t think it’s wise if declined to keep repeating the same request, to try and force a decision. You accept and move on.
Can you reach the gym (in game) from the sidewalk? If yes, what benefit is there to removing it? Plenty of landmarks are Wayspots even though the public is not allowed to traverse them.
My personal interpretation is that “safe for pedestrians” means that it’s okay to lead pedestrians to the location where the pin is placed (which should be a placemark for the point of interest). This one feels safer to me than the Wayspots in the middle of traffic circles, where we definitely should not be leading pedestrians. Having a fence up ensures that pedestrians can explore and see the point of interest without wandering into an unsafe area.
EDIT: Just realized there is no sidewalk. What’s on the other side near that building? Is the building related to the water tower? I’ll take a look on the map.
The pins for wayspots should be on the POI, not on a nearby location that is easier to access.
Safe for pedestrians specifically means that the POI is safely accessible and can be touched by pedestrians standing on or next to it. It is incorrect to interpret this as meaning that the wayspot location can be different and accessible when the POI isn’t.
A POI for an object on a traffic roundabout is not eligible, even if you could spin it from the pedestrian pavement.
Yes, what I mean is that we don’t always place a map pin on the exact POI but on the entryway to it. For example, rather than placing the pin in the middle of a basketball court, we would place it at the entrance, to avoid leading pedestrians into an area that could be unsafe during a basketball game. But you’re right – we should be able to touch the POI.
I agree – it bothers me that so many of these get approved.
Agreed – I just wasn’t sure if this was a car free part of campus and those roads were for pedestrians other than, for example, campus maintenance vehicles. After taking a closer look, these definitely look like roads for cars and not for people, so this does look unsafe for pedestrians.
Therefore the problem is that it is not safe for groups of people to congregate at one location on the road for raiding at a 20m radius from the gym, but that is completely irrelevant for whether the gym itself is safely accessible (to people allowed to be there).
(attached pic showing timestamp of picture taken)
