I did manage to at least find the map created by Niantic that showed Blue Crest Hill. This is a screenshot of Ingress’s intel map. Ingress being another game created by Niantic.
I’m not sure if you’re getting that from intel.ingress.com or from the IITC mobile app. Either way, I believe it’s pulling from a GIS map and may be integrating information from your parks website. I’m not a cartography expert, that’s just what I think at the moment. If so, it would be referencing a source you’re already using and I don’t think much help but definitely interesting to see.
“Signless parks” and natural features have been a highly contested topic. Despite the 3.1 criteria update that launched years ago and the more recent Criteria Clarifications update posted by @NianticTintino, these still suffer a high rejection rate and are often met by a “sorry, nominate the sign even though it’s technically eligible without a sign” when presented to the Appeals team. I believe these types of nominations are still left confusing to reviewers and clearly create issues amongst ourselves and Niantic teams.
The content submitter of this park has shared information from the city parks proving this land as a park. The green space used as the park appears to stretch over a block with this hill as probably the best focal point.
Parks are great places to explore, exercise and socialize. A nomination can be made for a park even if a park does not have a physical sign but is clearly a park. If there is an obvious entrance or focal point, that would be a good location to place the pin, but equally the middle of the park may be suitable. The supporting photo and text should provide evidence that the location is intended to be used as a park or recreational area.
I feel like this candidate meets the intent of this clarification and an overzealous internal reviewer removed it from Lightship after it was approved, possibly by the ML model. It does not meet any published removal criteria.
If you agree with me, could you please reinstate the Wayspot? I think the content submitter and I can discuss a way to improve the Description to help better support context that this is a park. If you disagree, could you please “circle back” to the guidelines and offer better clarification on how submitters and reviewers should handle these? Because right now this seems textbook “it’s intended by local ordinance and the community to be a park yet lacks official signage.” Growing up with familiarity to areas like this I know how vital shared green spaces are for recreation of kids, youth, and adults as well as a place for picnics or other socialization. I can’t imagine how a sign would do anything more to prove legitimacy of this nor should the sign be necessary.
Thanks!
Thanks for sharing these! When I had looked at Street View before, I didn’t see anything that looked like a “hill” here, but you managed to take a photo of it that would be recognizable as a visual anchor when arriving at the Wayspot per previously stated criteria for signless parks. I hope the team reconsiders the removal with the extra evidence you submitted here.
Thank you everyone who has contributed to this discussion so far. I have learned a lot through all of this and will be better equipped in the future because of it. Regardless of the outcome I appreciate everyone for hearing me out and being so understanding with me while I state my case.
It has actually been pretty fun!
Thanks for the appeal, @MackDaddyT. We have taken another look but stand by our decision to retire the Wayspot.
Thank you for your time @NianticLC
If you don’t mind me asking, what was the reason that led to this decision and is there any changes I can make to create a more acceptable nomination in this area?
This is an open land which is ineligible; a natural feature/landscape. A natural feature when used as an attraction landmark/park/play area should have a sign representing it or amenities within the area.
Well screw that.
…sign to a post and call it a park!
Seriously, @MackDaddyT if all they need is a sign, your community should be able to come together and post one. I am not suggesting that you just stick something in the ground, but this mini park was not accepted, even on appeal, even with the benches and walking path, and I was told to get a sign by the appeals team. And then the community did add this sign and the park was accepted on resubmit with the addition of this informational sign on butterflies.
Not accepted:
Accepted:
Or this would be a perfect area by the mailboxes for a Little Free Library that would be in an eligible spot.
Did you guys literally just buy/design/make a sign to describe what was there? Or did you ask the council?
Actually I had nothing to do with it. The same folks who tended the garden and marked all the plants posted the sign. I have no idea if they know that it made it Wayspot eligible. They applied for this program: Monarch Watch Monarch Waystation Program
Thanks for all the tips everyone I will definitely reach out and see what we can do about getting some signage put up.
@cyndiepooh I love your idea about a free library I’m sure the kids and parents in the neighborhood would really enjoy something like that!
Another item you might be able to instal is an insect hotel.bGreat for the environment and educational. You can get the community involved in designing and building it even.
Get the backing of the local council.
Think carefully where these might go.
Unfortunately, individualized feedback is not something Niantic is known for, and when it is it usually doubles down on the wrong things - see the reply above.
I think you noticed some skepticism from the community about the accuracy of this Wayspot and intended use. As community reviewers, we’re conditioned to signs because that’s the most obvious physical feature used to prove authenticity. When I think of natural features that have inherent eligibility, I think of jetties into ponds or lakes, an exposed boulder with historic context, or a regionally/nationally known tree famous for age, size, etc.
One part of the clarification I shared bares repeating:
The supporting photo and text should provide evidence that the location is intended to be used as a park or recreational area.
I don’t know what else you can find. I’ve thought critically of this nomination and I’m honestly not sure if, going in, I would have accepted it. “The onus is on the submitter to prove eligibility,” and your text does not do much heavy lifting. Some things I think would convince me include but are not limited a Facebook post for a community get together hosted there, a city page supporting park usage (I think your assessor page is bare minimum but I would really like to see something more), or an events page/photo of a social mixer at the location or expressing it as a place where children are encouraged to play throughout the year.
You could try building text supporting that and making an earnest plea without sounding insincere about how greenspaces are critical in urban or even rural settings to provide community children a safe place to play outdoors with each other without having to venture too far or how it helps families & friends connect outdoors on 3rd spaces.
Submitters are sometimes conditioned to either not focus on text since it’s so secondary in game or to use minimal text because “Playground / Playground / It’s a playground” gets accepted just as readily as one waxing poetics, but some nominations need the better text - and if you continue submitting can be quite fun.
Feel free to think on it, write up something, give it a try, and/or report back here as much as it takes. Of course, some of the alternate options above can also help both improve the area and be “easier” submissions.
@Gendgi you have been a tremendous help through this entire process and I appreciate you immensely for it.
I will take everything you have said into consideration on my next nominations and thank you again for the time and thought you’ve put into this.
This entire town feels as though it has tripled in size in the last 4 years so the area has some updating to do now that people actually live here. If the community members were to come together to request some amenities or at the very least get some signage at our parks, I’m sure the city would oblige.