Im having a bit of an issue and I’m sure it’s an error due to the AI system. I really would like for a person to review my nominations and force them through because this is not fair, I’ve used up nearly all my nominations. I don’t know why any of these would be rejected. These are all legitimate. I uploaded all of these last night and within a few hours all of these were flagged. I don’t know what happened or why this happened. I tried to appeal one of them. I don’t know what the issue is. You can see that one of them actually did make it to Queue But I don’t know why only that one did. Can I please have somebody review my stuff and fix it for me?
Good day and welcome!
As the corresponding rejection says, those were rejected by the automatic process (ML/AI filter).
Your example for the playground sign may have been correctly rejected as a duplicate of Saint Monica Playground that already exists as a wayspot. The sign alone in this case would not necessarily be eligible by itself; but may act as a placemarker for an eligible object (the playground). The same logic may apply to the others as well as the “murals” that may not be seen as artistic murals following Unique Art.
I suggest posting the nominations for more precise advice for each. It may be best to post one first for a continuous topic discussion.
I will admit to having cropped some of the photos to make the sign a bit more centered and stuff like that, no ai or photoshop or color changing or anything like that. Would that make the system flag it?
I’m new to this, but thank you. Should I try to resubmit with better photos and titles?
I first question how each would be meet eligibility criteria. That should be shown through the submission via text and supporting info. Without these, we can’t establish if it could be acceptable.
That would also be why I recommended posting the full nomination first.
Also agree with the playground rules sign. The playground at this church is already a Wayspot, so the sign by itself is ineligible, as it just tells you of the rules, which aren’t that all interesting and unique.
The flags are pretty indistinct and most likely ineligible. Many places, especially in the US, have flag poles, so they are seen as indistinct and ineligible. If there is a dedication or memorial plaque, such as a memorial to veterans, at the flag poles, that would be a better thing to submit. I’m not seeing any plaque or memorial at the flag poles on Street View.
The Pitch In sign is ineligible, as most parks, walking paths, etc, have signs that are either the same or similar, asking people to pick up after themselves and not leave garbage lying around, making it an indistinct sign. These signs were also mass produced and put up in many places in the US during the late 20th century.
What you call the Cross and Alpha/Omega tile murals must be inside of St Monica’s. Those aren’t murals, per se, more like tile art. If they are inside of the church, it’s possible that your suporting photo doesn’t show them with the surrounding area, just the surrounding area. The supporting photo needs to show what is being nominated with the surrounding area, so it can best be located, even if inside.
The mural for the barber shop is really just an advertisement for the shop, not really an artistic mural. It’s meant to tell people that the shop is in the building and how to contact them. There also seems to be 2 of these on this building on Street View, so that also doesn’t make it unique art.
The picnic tables may be eligible and would be worth resubmitting. I would title it as a picnic area instead of picnic tables, as it makes it seem more permanent. I also have to wonder about the supporting photo, as I think I see them on satellite view behind the church around 30.594113709304516, -87.30984745703296, but that area is blocked by trees on Street View, so hard to tell. Again, the supporting photo needs to include the POI being nominated with the surrounding area, not just the surrounding area.
The Cantonment Square sign may make it to be reviewed, as it’s for a shopping center with a few businesses that may not be eligible on their own, but the center itself may be worth exploring or even socializing with other at.
Lastly, I would encourage you to go over the Wayspot Criteria section, to get an idea of what may or may not be eligible. The Criteria Clarification Collection is another good resourse, as it covers many of the most asked about POIs and gives examples of what may or may not be eligible.
3 Likes
Hello @Savbreon
It must feel very confusing to have so many rejected when you felt confident that these.
Although it seems intuitive to look at places that are already pokestops for inspiration as to what might be eligible, it is actually the wrong thing to do. This is because the criteria around eligibility can change over time, and sometimes places are approved in error.
And this is why people here will direct you to the criteria to help assess which of yours may be eligible.
We will be very happy to help you improve ones that do meet criteria to make them good nominations.
Please do post them in this topic. We will need both photos the text and location.
1 Like
Thank you for sharing this screenshot. Previously when I didn’t have an appeal to use, the “Appeal” button wasn’t there.
I think I’ve seen this if I submit an appeal, and have none left, but during that same session there is still an appeal button. If I log out and back in, its gone
2 Likes