Clarification of nomination - Street sign

Review Support
1

Hey All, so I have received a few of these in my review nominations recently and just wanted to get some feedback. I feel these are ineligible but wanted to get a consensus. The nomination is for a sign that is a street sign, although it has been placed on a decorative boundary fence. Given how many of these I am seeing I am starting to think that these are going to become like the NSW state survey marks. These signs are not unique other than the street name, and there are multiple in the local area making them generic nor are they interesting, they are always located on the boundary of a private residence.

Please see the example attached. Thanks for any feedback.

IMG_4648.HEIC
IMG_4648.HEIC3024Ă—4032 2.24 MB

IMG_4650.HEIC
IMG_4650.HEIC4032Ă—3024 3.58 MB

IMG_4649.HEIC
IMG_4649.HEIC3024Ă—4032 2.39 MB

2

Generally people reject these under “not distinct” unless the nomination is for art work or a sculptural element. No one really manages to prove how this meets any of the 3 acceptance criteria. It’s also tolerated by some reviewers under the idea that it really is no different from the city name sign. If its on the wall of a person’s yard then reject for private and if its in the median of the road usually it is a reject for safety unless a sidewalk goes to it.

3

Thank you yes that was exactly my line of thinking. thank you for your reply