This is a Wayspot that has existed for many years in Niantic games, many players have access to the portal as it is a safe and pleasant place, for that reason it was used as Linkstar for the current global event in Ingress Prime. This wayspot still exists in real life, we can provide the necessary evidence to support its existence. It is requested that this resource be reviewed and the portal be restored as soon as possible. thank you
Frontón is a racquet sport of Basque origin played on a court with three walls: front, side, and back. Players hit a ball against the front wall using a racquet, aiming to make it difficult for the opponent to return it before it bounces twice on the ground. The goal is to score points by making the opponent miss the return. It’s a fast-paced game that requires agility, precision, and strategy.
This portal was declared, with a bad location, it may exist but it was located near the offices where a Resistance agent works, because perhaps it is one of the reasons for the elimination of the portal. If the proposal is legal, just resend it and don’t make a show.
if that will be your argument to have a portal removed, you should evaluate and denounce some of the portals used by their enlightened faction that exist in the facilities of a mining camp with limited access, where also only an enlightened agent has access, also that portal.
“Canchas de Fronton CCDL” exists for a long time and many times was destroyed by enlightened agents.
This portal exists and is inside the city
Wayspot Title: Canchas de Frontón CCDL Location (lat/lon): -12.208353, -77.023069 City: Lima Country: Peru
As an Ingress player, I would like to highlight several relevant aspects concerning the Wayspot "Canchas de Frontón CCDL":
Restricted Access: The club where this Wayspot is located is a private property with access limited to members and invited guests only. According to Niantic's guidelines, portals should be located in areas accessible to the general public. This access restriction might contravene the guidelines established in Wayfarer.
Portal Duplication: There is an observed presence of multiple portals in the same area, which could constitute a duplication issue. The portals in this location include:
Cancha de Frontón Nro 5 CCDL Coordinates: -12.208029, -77.022726
Cancha de Frontón #6 CCDL Coordinates: -12.208177, -77.022904
Cancha de Frontón #7 CCDL Coordinates: -12.208001, -77.023118
Cancha de Frontón Nro 8 CCDL Coordinates: -12.207983, -77.023306
Additionally, there is excessive creation of individual portals duplicating the general portal "Canchas de Frontón CCDL," instead of uniquely representing specific places of interest. This behavior may lead to system congestion and does not align with Niantic's guidelines, which suggest that portals should be unique and avoid unnecessary duplication.
Membership Requirement: Access to this club requires a high membership fee, which limits access for many players. This factor might also be relevant according to the accessibility guidelines.
Given this information, it may be prudent to review these aspects when considering the restoration of the portal. Thank you for your attention.
I am not looking at anything w.r.t. the eligibility or ineligibility of any of the specific wayspots mentioned in this thread, but these statements are categorically false regarding Niantic’s policies. Wayspots must be accessible to pedestrians who are allowed to have access. There is no requirement that the general public have access. There is no requirement that everyone have access.
If wayspots on private property where fees are required for entrance met removal or rejection criteria, Disneyland would not have any wayspots.
To clarify: places within a restricted members-only community are eligible. As long as there is safe pedestrian access to members it is acceptable as a wayspot. That means wayspots aren’t always accessible to the general public which can be frustrating in-game.
If the argument is that "Canchas de Frontón CCDL" has restricted access, it is also relevant to consider other portals with similar restrictions. For example, the portal "La Maloca" is located within a military naval base, where access is limited exclusively to designated military personnel.
Portal "La Maloca" Location (lat/lon): -12.030088, -77.130258 Access: Restricted to designated military personnel only
Additionally, it is important to note that the mentioned mining camp operates as a mini-city for miners, meaning it has public access within its area, unlike a private club.
According to Niantic's Wayfarer guidelines, portals should be located in areas accessible to the general public. Each case should be evaluated based on these rules, without applying criteria selectively. The evaluation of "Canchas de Frontón CCDL" should consider these aspects objectively. Thank you for your attention.
Thank you for the clarification, but I would like to address and refute some points:
Pedestrian Access: While it is true that wayspots must be accessible to pedestrians who are allowed to access, Niantic's policies also emphasize the importance of general accessibility. A wayspot located on private property with restricted access may comply with the rules if access is adequate for regular users of the area and if it provides sufficient access for most players.
Theme Park Examples: The fact that Disneyland has wayspots does not negate the need to evaluate accessibility in specific contexts. Theme parks like Disneyland typically offer broader public access, even if there are entrance fees, which is not necessarily comparable to private properties with more severe access restrictions.
Evaluation of Specific Cases: Each wayspot case should be assessed based on actual accessibility and established guidelines, not just general examples. It is crucial to consider the specific situation of each portal and how it aligns with Niantic's policies to ensure it meets the accessibility and relevance requirements.
They can have them, but they shouldn’t be eligible only for some. I think waypoints should be for everyone in general and these portals should be eliminated.
Their policies also don’t talk about levels of access, aside from making it clear that non-operational areas of military bases are eligible, and single-family private property is ineligible.
Yes, but your understanding of the accessibility requirements is incorrect.
That is not in line with Niantic’s current policies.
