I don’t understand how the proposal fails to meet the required criteria despite the complaint. Could someone explain it to me ?
These are remnants of old sewer pipes that were placed there when the village was founded to create a small play area for children nearly 50 years ago, located on a dirt path.
Can we see the whole nomination please, including the title, description, main and supporting images and supporting statement? At the moment we can’t see the whole thing so it makes advising harder
Also, is there an existing wayspot for the play area, whether for the play area as a whole or for a separate feature?
(A single play area cannot have wayspots for individual elements. Where the elements are spread out and it is multiple play areas, this depends on a judgement call by reviewers as to whether they really are separate play areas.)
So far i see nothing but sewer pipe. If this is not true, you need better photo
I definitely see more than random pieces of sewer pipe. They have been deliberately cut, shaped and positioned to create things for children to safely crawl through and play around.
I think the problem is whether people think it is an official play area or just left over building waste that over the years kids have “turned in to” a play area.
Surprised with todays health and safety it hasn’t been removed 
Locally we had a similar thing but it was definitely made as a play area. Walled off and other items made from left over concrete and house bricks from the new builds (us kids called it the “Brickies”). The number of cuts, bumps and grazes we got was ridiculous. Its now a car park
I suppose it’s possible it wasn’t a deliberate play area. Given how damn heavy those things are, I don’t think it’s likely there were buried in the ground like this without purpose, all at the same height with the same size of crawl space.
I’d love to see the entire nomination to confirm though, including the supporting photo and location.
They were placed there deliberately. At the time of the village’s construction, they had some leftover sewer pipe sections, so they placed them there to create a play area along with cut wooden logs arranged as play elements. Over time, the logs rotted and were removed, but the pipes remained. It’s somewhat of a relic from the early days of our village.
If it’s been designed as a deliberate play area, I would make more of that in your nomination. It seems you’ve focussed more on the history than on it being a space for children to play and ended up not being very convincing. I think your title should make it clear that its a playground.
For example, this is the way I’d approach this.
Title: Pipe Playground
Description: Childrens’ play area created from 50 year old sewer pipes which serve as tunnels and hiding places.
Supporting information: here you would want to include details of this area, the history if you want to, and any links to pages even social media that support this being a play area. You could even use a supporting picture that shows the children playing.
@Oblan you might want to edit the title of this thread so that it is obvious you are querying an appeal rejection. For example, “Appeal Rejected for Pipe Playground”. This improves the chances that Niantic staff will comment (I don’t know if they read /every/ thread all the way through).
If you are nearby, definitely resubmit as suggested by @frealafgb. This looks like a good wayspot, so give it the best chance to be accepted.
I would avoid children in the supporting, because reviewers can take against things for no good reason (sometimes submissions get rejected for containing car license plates… in the supporting photo). Families would be OK though. Also, consider taking daytime photos, because reviewers can take against things for no good reason. Even though your photos are excellent, night-time photos can lower acceptance rates.
Thank you for your responses and explanations. I’ll try to submit it again differently.
