A mural that had been changed over the years was a Waypoint I recently applied for removal and was rejected. Yesterday, I went to appeal it with my GPS photos and other support.
A couple of hours ago, I noticed that the “Sunset Beauty Mural” had both it’s photo and name changed now to the “Stay Forever Mural”. I was really confused when I went over to check and saw all the artwork I pointed out for my appeal is removed. I didn’t get a response from Niantic in my appeal as of now.
Here is what I mean. In my appeal, which I took a screenshot in the game, I showed that there was a history of it from 10 years ago and to as little as five months ago of changing “artwork”:
I understood when making the appeal that “repurposing” had occurred in the past and that since the “Sunset Beauty Mural” was no longer there, I did the proper steps to remove it. Now after today, I was really confused because there must be some precedent or exception to this rule. I just want to know for the future and I don’t want to be in trouble appealing a removal, as I acted in good faith what I have learned about “repurposing”. It wasn’t until my participation in this forum that I learned what was.
Here is one quote I found that maybe brings to light.
In summary, I want to learn, in the instance of this removal application and appeal, if I missed a rule about artwork such as murals with the same location.
I look forward for clarity and alignment given this example. I hope that I am not in trouble for the appeal of the removal if I missed a caveat about artwork.
If a mural changes, as in the design/art, but is in the same location, it’s not considered repurposing to update the title/description/photos. This is most likely why your removal request was rejected, as it can be updated to the current info for the mural, which seems to be the step staff took instead.
Repurposing a Wayspot would be if a business changes, i.e. a restaurant that once was serving Chinese closed and a Mexican restaurant took its place in the same location. If the Chinese restaurant had a Wayspot, that one would have to be removed before a new nomination can be submitted for the Mexican one.
I am understanding that if artwork exists at the same location (e.g. the very same wall), it’s just a unilateral change of name, description and photo as one go.
This would be different, for example, if the artwork was on a different pillar or wall maybe a couple meters away (on a different wall).
It’s like the church example, where a denomination only changed it’s name/mission, but the very same denomination and location/building was held constant, so it’s just a name change/photo change/description change was the proper recourse.
Repurposing would be as you described Mexican to Chinese, or maybe a church changing denominations and aesthetics (so it’s a different congregation altogether?) then remain the definition of trying to change an object nearby or within it.
I am very appreciative of any clarification on the rules. I want to also be cognizant of Niantic’s time, as well and what I could have done differently.
I wouldn’t say nearby or within it. The business example is one that is used quite a bit, and I have had Wayspots removed for businesses that have completely changed.
Whenever I hear of something closing or has closed that has a Wayspot, I will request removal; I just had a games/record shop and restaurant Wayspots removed that recently closed. I did this mainly to ensure that if there are ever any businesses that meet criteria opened in these buildings in the future, a new nomination will have to be made, as well as making sure the map is accurate.
I’ve never had to deal with a church changing denominations, just with a name change, so I can’t say how that would be seen.
