Auto-rejected by ML Bot? Need help with Historical Architectural Heritage in Budapest

[gyiknyak]

Hello everyone,

I am looking for some advice and support regarding a few of my recent nominations in Budapest, Hungary. I have been trying to submit beautiful, historically significant architectural details and heritage buildings. Unfortunately, they keep getting rejected almost immediately by the automated system (ML Bot), and I even wasted an Upgrade on one of them.

Since it’s the automated ML process rejecting them, no specific rejection criteria are given. I am sharing the details of my nominations below, including the English translations for the local text and historical sources.

Nomination 1:

Title: The Architectural Heritage of the Román Brothers

Description: A late Art Nouveau balcony with an exceptionally elaborate design, from a residential apartment building constructed in 1914, already leaning toward pre-modernism. The building was designed by Ernő Román and Miklós Román, one of the most prolific architect brother duos of the era, commissioned by Mrs. János Janács. A beautiful piece of Budapest’s architectural heritage.

Supplemental Information: The building was designed by the famous Hungarian architect duo, Ernő and Miklós Román. Their architectural legacy is highly significant in Budapest, and they even have their own Wikipedia page documenting their historic works across the city. This balcony is a prime example of their style and is an essential part of the local architectural heritage.

Architect Source: Román Ernő – Wikipédia

Location: https://maps.google.com/?q=47.49138,19.07135 (Budapest, Víg utca 15.)

Rejection Reason: Declined by Niantic’s automated process. (This one was also Upgraded).

Nomination 2:

Title: A Savoy-ház női maszkaronja (Translation: Female Mascaron of the Savoy House)

Description: 1898-ban épült Sachs-bérház (később a történelmi Grand Hotel Savoy épületegyüttese) eklektikus homlokzatát díszítő neoreneszánsz női maszkaron. A kártusban, gyümölcs- és virágfüzérekkel körülvett arc a századfordulós Budapest egyik legszebb, épségben maradt művészeti emléke.

(Translation: A Neo-Renaissance female mascaron decorating the eclectic facade of the Sachs apartment building (later part of the historic Grand Hotel Savoy complex), built in 1898. The face, set in a cartouche and surrounded by fruit and flower garlands, is one of the most beautiful, intact artistic relics of turn-of-the-century Budapest.)

Supplemental Information: This architectural detail belongs to the historic Sachs apartment building, which later became the famous Grand Hotel Savoy. It is a highly documented and significant piece of Budapest’s architectural heritage. The building has recently undergone a major architectural restoration.

Historical Source: Három az egyben? Elkészült a volt Savoy nagyszálló épületének jelentős átalakítása

Location: https://maps.google.com/?q=47.49525,19.07185 (Budapest, Bacsó Béla utca 13.)

Rejection Reason: Declined by Niantic’s automated process.

Nomination 3:

Title: Díszes Neobarokk Homlokzati Oromzat (Translation: Ornate Neo-Baroque Facade Gable)

Description: A 19. századi Neobarokk és Eklektikus építészet egyik kiemelkedő magyarországi példája. A homlokzat oromzatán (tympanum) egy cartouche (díszpajzs) látható, közepén egy mask-aron (arcmaszk) domborművel, amelyet gazdag növénymintás stukkó és dentils (fogazat) vesz körül.

(Translation: An outstanding Hungarian example of 19th-century Neo-Baroque and Eclectic architecture. The facade gable (tympanum) features a cartouche with a mascaron relief in the center, surrounded by rich botanical stucco patterns and dentils.)

Supplemental Information: This ornate Neo-Baroque facade gable belongs to the historic Mészáros apartment building. It is a highly significant and specifically documented piece of Budapest’s local history and architecture. A recent local history article specifically highlights the architectural significance and the historic roof ornaments of this exact building.

Historical Source: Budapest elveszett tetődíszei – A Mészáros-bérház - Vasárnap.hu

Location: https://maps.google.com/?q=47.49448,19.06886 (Budapest, Rákóczi út 43. / Békési utca corner)

Rejection Reason: Declined by Niantic’s automated process.

(Attached are the screenshots of my nominations, including the photos and the text)

As you can see from the photos and the descriptions, these are unique, historic architectural features with real cultural value, clearly eligible under the Niantic guidelines.

Is there something specific I should change in the titles or descriptions to prevent the ML bot from auto-rejecting them? Or could an Ambassador possibly take a look and manually review them?

Thank you in advance for your time and help!

Mod Edit - please do not tag staff unnecessarily. The Wayfarer Team read and respond when appropriate.

[cyndiepooh]

@gyiknyak

Unfortunately, they keep getting rejected almost immediately by the automated system (ML Bot), and I even wasted an Upgrade on one of them.

Welcome to the forum.

There is supposed to be a 24 hour period before the “automated process” can reject your nomination, and there is supposed to be a 24 hour period before you can apply an upgrade to prevent an automated process rejection from wasting your upgrade. Did these spend time in “Upload later” before being rejected?

[gyiknyak]

Thanks for the welcome!

No, I didn’t use the “Upload later” feature, I submitted them directly on the spot.

However, I actually reached out to the regular support about this earlier, and their response perfectly explains how my Upgrade got wasted. They sent me this:

“Prior to the ML being momentarily disabled, this check came before the state “in coordination.” The ML appears to be retrospectively verifying this status as well now that it has been enabled once more.”

So what likely happened is that the ML bot was temporarily down, the 24-hour safe period passed so the system allowed me to apply my Upgrade, but then they turned the ML back on and it retrospectively auto-rejected my Upgraded nomination.

It’s really frustrating to lose an Upgrade to a retroactive bot glitch like this! Hopefully, an Ambassador can take a look at these to save them.

[cyndiepooh]

Ambassadors would not be able to do anything about this. I am not sure even @NianticAaron can unreject a nomination, but if anyone could, it would be him.

Architectural details seem to be hard to get past the Machine Learning check, so may have required a human appeal anyway. It looks like you have your facts together and don’t need coaching on that. Beautiful photos!

[gyiknyak]

@cyndiepooh Thank you so much for the warm welcome and the kind words about the photos and research! I really appreciate it.

It is somewhat a relief to know that the ML bot historically struggles with architectural details.
at least I know it isn’t an issue with my submission quality. I was just really hoping to avoid using my bi-weekly Appeals on instant bot rejections, especially since I lost an Upgrade to the retroactive ML check on the Román Brothers balcony.

Fingers crossed that @NianticAaron might be able to take a look, or at least pass these examples on to the team to help train the ML model better on historical European architecture! Thanks again for your help.

[wooperIooper]

Szia!

Architectural details can be tricky tp submit.

Please note that

@NianticTintino

Architectural details on buildings like those pictured below may be eligible depending on the specific case that is made. Some cities have a dominant architectural style, and every single building in the area may have features that are in that style. As a result, those features may not be considered unique.

I think you’re doing everything right with the info you provide (though I find the English title sort of unspecific), but some districts of Budapest do have a lot of buildings with art nouveau-style details which might be seen as not distinct.

This is a reply I have gotten for a denied appeal for a similar submission:
Thanks for the appeal, Wayfinder! We could not verify the historic significance of this object at the specified location. Hence, we are unable to reverse the decision. We recommend that you resubmit the nomination with additional information in the supporting nomination text column such as articles to verify its significance at the present time which would greatly increase the odds of approval.

AFAIK Hungary has kind of dissolved the organization in charge of protected buildings so I’m not sure if something like an official list of listed buildings exists (and whether your examples would be listed) but linking to that would be good.

[gyiknyak]

Thank you so much for the detailed insight and the advice!

You raise a very valid point about the English title for the Román Brothers’ building. The truth is, I have actually submitted these multiple times and kept changing the titles (experimenting with both highly specific and broader ones) just to see if a different phrasing would finally bypass the ML bot or appeal more to the reviewers! But you are completely right, calling it something like “Art Nouveau Balcony by the Román Brothers” is much more descriptive, and I will definitely stick to specific titles like that if I have to resubmit.

Regarding the “not unique” aspect and the heritage lists: you are spot on. Budapest does have a lot of Eclectic and Art Nouveau buildings, and the official governmental heritage protection system in Hungary has been restructured recently, making official lists hard to navigate.

However, that is exactly why I included those specific links in my Supplemental Information!

Budapest100 (organized by the Hungarian Contemporary Architecture Centre) acts as a highly researched, professional database for historical buildings.

The other links are from professional architectural journals (Építészfórum) and local history articles that specifically highlight the historical significance of these exact mascarons and roof ornaments.

I really appreciate you sharing that denied appeal response from your own experience. It confirms that gathering and linking these specific historical articles in my supporting info was the right move to prove they aren’t mass-produced generic elements. Now I just hope the ML bot (or the human reviewers) actually open the links! Thanks again!

[gyiknyak]

It just came back rejected by the human Appeal team. The exact reason given was: “The submission lacks uniqueness or historical and cultural meaning.”

Seeing this is incredibly discouraging. A historic, century-old carved stone relief was just dismissed by the review team as a generic decoration. Because of this experience, I am honestly terrified to use my remaining Appeals on my other nominations (the Savoy House and the Román Brothers balcony). Even though I now have the official architectural database links and history articles for those, it feels like the review team just automatically rejects architectural details in my region without truly looking at their historical value.

Is the system just fundamentally stacked against historical architectural heritage? It feels like no matter how much effort I put into following the guidelines, it is just an uphill battle. Any advice (or a miracle intervention from an Ambassador/Staff) would be highly appreciated. @NianticAaron

[salixsorbus]

I think the issue is that when an area has a lot of architectural heritage, not everything is worth exploring. Exploration is the only criteria under which this will be eligible.

Similarly with resutaurants, when an area has lot of high quality restaurants, it will be a struggle to get every restaurant as a wayspot.

[gyiknyak]

That is a fair point in theory, but looking at the actual in-game map around my location, the reality is the exact opposite!

My immediate area is mostly filled with very generic, everyday Wayspots (standard playgrounds, random information boards, and basic public spaces). It is definitely not oversaturated with architectural heritage on the map.

This is exactly why I am trying to submit these historic details under the “Exploration” criteria. Discovering a documented, 100-year-old carved mascaron or a specific Art Nouveau balcony among a sea of “boring” or generic stops is the very definition of a great place for exploration. It encourages players to look up from their phones and notice the hidden history of the neighborhood instead of just walking past another standard playground.

[salixsorbus]

it is better not to describe playgrounds or information boards as random and boring, because that is doing a disservice to the criteria of Social, Exploration and Exercise.

As far as something to explore is concerned, an information board is not interesting, but then it isn’t trying to be. Very few trail markers are interesting and worth exploring, but they don’t try to be - they are about Exercise.

You need to convince reviewers that this architectural feature is special and worth of exploration when the one 10 yards away isn’t. It’s not about this being different to the other wayspots and therefore interesting, it’s about it being worthy of exploration for itself.

[gyiknyak]

You make a very fair point, and I apologize for using the words “boring” or “random”. that was just my frustration speaking! I completely respect that playgrounds and trail markers perfectly fit the Exercise and Social criteria, and they are essential to the game.

My intent is exactly what you highlighted in your last sentence: I want to show that these specific architectural features are worthy of exploration for themselves.
That is exactly why I went out of my way to gather the specific historical articles, the official Budapest100 architectural archive links, and the architect’s Wikipedia page for the Supplemental Information.

[TjoeMi]

Is this the only one? Or is it many surrounding building. Since the appeal rejection said its mass produced, you need to prove it.

[PokeTuckerJ324]

Did you put any emojis in the title of your nominations? I see a lightning bolt icon in one of your Wayspot nomination titles from the photo you provided. This may have triggered the automatic AI rejection.

[gyiknyak]

No, these are definitely not mass-produced elements present on every surrounding building. The neighborhood has a huge mix of different architectural styles and eras. That is exactly why I included the specific historical articles, the architect’s Wikipedia page, and the Budapest100 database links in my Supplemental Information. Those links serve exactly as the proof that these are uniquely designed, documented pieces of art belonging exclusively to these specific buildings, rather than generic cast decorations.

[gyiknyak]

Haha, no emojis in the titles at all! That lightning bolt is just the official Wayfarer UI icon indicating that the nomination was "Upgraded

[wooperIooper]

What was the source you linked for this specific decoration?

[PokeTuckerJ324]

Oh, sorry I misunderstood

[gyiknyak]

All the specific sources and links are actually listed in my original post at the top of this thread!

[gyiknyak]

The automated Machine Learning (ML) system is systematically auto-rejecting valid, highly detailed nominations of historical architectural heritage in Budapest, Hungary. Despite providing thorough research, professional architectural database links, and Wikipedia pages in the Supplemental Information to prove their uniqueness, the bot rejects them within hours. It ignores the evidence completely. This bug is wasting Upgrades, making the Wayfarer experience incredibly frustrating, and punishing players who actually take the time to research local history to encourage exploration. (Please see the attached screenshot of the massive wall of auto-rejections).

Date first (or most recently) experienced:

Ongoing issue, most recently experienced between April 8 - April 10, 2026.

Device type, model, and operating system:

iPhone 14, iOS 26.3.1

Game & Game Version (if applicable):

Pokémon GO (Latest Version) / Wayfarer Web Interface