To start out, I’ve been using Wayfarer since its inception in 2019 and have gotten around 500 Wayspots approved. I’ve seen so many changes over the years as to what’s acceptable and what’s not, so I have a pretty good idea of what should, without question, be approved.
One of those examples is a locally owned restaurant that does not fall under a chain franchise category. Specifically Asian restaurants. Over the years those have been fairly safe and solid nominations that are consistently approved for their uniqueness and for being great places to socialize. Every now and then they do get rejected, but are fairly easy to appeal.
Until now. A fairly new Japanese restaurant in my city that has a unique name, “Ja Bomb”, is located in our largest shopping mall. They are locally owned and more than qualified to be a Wayspot. It got rejected a few days after entering Niantic voting the same day I nominated it. So I appealed it. Rejected again. Now explain to me how one of my other nominations, “China Star”, went through the appeal process without an issue. A very similar restaurant with a similar atmosphere….
Yes I got a little aggressive with the appeal and brought the trail marker argument into it, but my frustrations with appeals have been at an all-time high. I’ve had recent simple title edits rejected through appeals that should have been an easy change. One was a park sign with the words “Steamboat Park” clearly printed on it, but they chose to reject this change in favor of the old title “Smoke and Wheel” (the sign is shaped like a smokestack and a paddle wheel).
They always want us to “review what makes a great Wayspot” which is ironic because they don’t seem to know either.
If I’m being honest, i think you’ve gotten lucky in your earlier appeals. You seem to spend more time talking about other places than the place you’re appealing.
They want some kind of proof that the place you’re nominating is not just a random restaurant. You should find links to news articles or at least review sites that prove the community places a high value on this location.
I typically look at the restaurant’s own website for “Our Story.” Often, they will tell you about the owners and what makes their place unique in the area.
I also have found that restaurants of Asian cuisine fly through local voting pretty easily. But if i have to appeal one, i make sure to make a solid case for why this restaurant is distinguishable from all the others nearby.
You did get lucky with China Star. You’ve even told people to reject it since it already has wayspots and this is just the entrance sign, which is a proxy for the restaurant.
Don’t assume restaurants are automatic - they aren’t. Show why this restaurant deserves to be a wayspot - show proof.
But how about this one? I’ve since gotten the title to what I wanted it to be, which is why the title in this screenshot matches what I wanted to name it, but before the title was just “Smoke and Wheel”.
So are park signs a proxy for parks? Say the park has a few Wayspots, like a playground and a basketball court. Does that disqualify the sign?
The Wayspots in the restaurant are a mural and a fountain. You’re saying those items disqualify something that represents the restaurant itself? Or do I just need to provide a better reason for why the restaurant deserves a Wayspot to represent itself?
This is why the inconsistency is annoying. We have to jump through hoops to prove that a locally owned restaurant is a great hangout spot that represents the community. I don’t know of any unique restaurants anywhere that DON’T fit that description. The whole point of a Wayspot is to get people to get out and explore their community, sometimes with friends. I would think that supporting local hangout spots would be an easy pass.
Yet a generic post in the ground with a red dot on it in the middle of some random trail gets a free pass. See what I’m saying? How is that significant and a unique restaurant is questionable?
It is possible you have chosen the sign, instead of the restaurant, because a wayspot at the actual restaurant would be blocked and would not appear in Pokemon Go. Reviewers will be able to tell that this is what is happening. Since the correct location for a restaurant is the restaurant, preferably the entrance, anything else is suspicious.
This is not the same as a park. A park generally needs a distinct focal point to be the wayspot, which is why an entrance is used because a random location in the park is not distinct.
A restaurant already has a distinct location - the entrance.
Well then shame on the person who was on appeal duty that day I guess. I’d agree if someone had nominated both the sign and the restaurant. Whenever I see a church nomination and if either the building or the sign is already in the game, I mark it as a duplicate.
In this case, I went with the object that clearly named the nomination. I wasn’t gonna pin it on the building because that’s not where the sign was located.
Can you show me where it says restaurant signs are off limits, just so I know for next time?
IMO: A sign is usually not eligible unless it is extremely arty in itself. An image of the Sign can be used as a “proxy” but I would still place the Pin at the actual Point of Interest.
Example: I currently have a Community Centre going through the process. There is a small sign at the Main Door but a huge sign at the car park entrance. I have used the Large sign for the Main Photo, The Pin is on the buildings entrance and 2 supplemental photos showing the full front area that includes both.
Like all those fancy trail signs that are sticks with red dots, or a tiny square arrow sign nailed to a tree.
I’ve always understood it that the Wayspot should be pinned on the very thing that the photo represents, which is how I’ve always done it. Successfully, the overwhelming majority of the time.
You can read my opinion several times on “Trail Markers” on these forums, I am not a fan. I know they are eligible so I would not Reject so I use my option to Skip.
I do not understand your argument pitting the rules for Restaurant Signs and Trail Markers against each other as they act in the same way.
A restaurant sign is a proxy for the Restaurant. Pin the Restaurant as that is the POI.
A trail marker is a proxy for the Trail. The Pin is on the Trail (as this is where the marker is located).
I have never, until today, heard this “proxy” rule. Is that something I’d have to dig for in the forums to find in writing?
The reason I keep bringing up insignificant trail signs is simply for the fact that they only meet one of the “big 3” qualifications - a place to encourage physical activity. As far as I remember, places to socialize, and places/objects that are historically/culturally significant are the other two. Or did that magically change somewhere deep within the forums too?
Locally owned, non-chain restaurants easily meet the “place to socialize” qualification, but everyone keeps saying it needs to also fall under historical/cultural. Why two? How are trail signs “culturally significant”?
Everyone has so far ignored the actual topic of this thread - inconsistency. I didn’t ask for anyone’s opinions on whether my nominations were worded good enough to pass an appeal or whether or not I should pin a sign where it’s not located, I was asking WHY two similar nominations got two different results. But as is usually the case on the forums, people love telling others how bad their nominations are instead of addressing Niantic Wayfarer flaws, which is why I rarely come here. I thought that would change after the forum revamp with all the Ingress players getting filtered out.
The forum is a welcoming place to all wayfinders no matter which game they may have submitted in.
Each nomination is assessed on its own merits and the same applies to appeals. There is no subject that means all nominations in that subject/type are automatically accepted. As nominators it is up to us to make the case each time.
The same applies to appeals. We need to demonstrate why something that was rejected should have been accepted. Like all wayfinders appeals staff are human. They may make decissions that turn out to be incorrect either way. But they can only make a decision based on what the nominator has provided.
The wayfarer team has said that they want to hear about specific appeals outcomes that may have been wrong. From time to time people post some decisions here and occasionally the decision is overturned.
So in my view with cases that could be judged to go either way there is highly likely to be a degree of judgement calling. and as no two nominations are exactly the same when it comes to restaurants the outcome may differ.
They do only need to meet one (hiking trails usually meet at least exercise and explore by the way, but that is besides the point.
However, the criteria clarification states that
In short, not every restaurant meets criteria just because you can socialize there. They need to be a GREAT place for socializing, which usually means they have to be unique, highly rated/well known, or interesting in another way
I can only speak of what I see in my Local reviews (UK based).
I find that most places that supply food to be eaten on-site gets Accepted whether that’s a Restaurant, Cafe or Family Friendly pub that does meals (UK use of these words, I know other countries may have different definitions). The only exceptions I see is where the place has low review scores (can’t be a great place to socialise if it gives everybody food poisoning ) or when the nominator makes false location / 3rd party images etc.
I do see the sort of place that you would call to grab a sandwich to take in to work (take out) being Accepted which IMO should not be.
I just think that an argument of “why has my thing been rejected when a completely different thing is accepted” is extremely weak especially when in my reviews I don’t see any difference to how they are reviewed. Stick to discussing the POI in question.
We are perfectly happy to discuss possible improvements if you believe you have had a Rejection which shouldn’t have happened. We are also happy to workshop a nomination that you are not sure of before you submit.
I haven’t looked for the actual quote but it’s one of those things that is regularly discussed so it is a “Learned with experience” type of thing, I am sure someone will know where it has been stated.
As above, we love to discuss the nominations that are put in front of us. We are not going to agree with someone “just to be nice” we are going to discuss “possible” reasons that they got a Reject, “possible” changes that could improve their chances or Reasons that they where correctly rejected.
In regards to inconsistency I think most of it will be caused by the nominator. If a nomination is Rejected by Local Reviewers and the appeal goes “Please change, Reviewers got it wrong” then the Appeal staff are likely to stick with the reviewers. You have to give them the reasons plus evidence why it was incorrectly rejected.
) or when the nominator makes false location / 3rd party images etc.