Went all in on that one 
Iām with you. If the nominator tells me about why the neighborhood is great for exploration in the description I usually approve them.
2 Likes
I donāt think Iām following what youāre saying here, but I would really like to! Can you please explain a bit more about how you came to this conclusion?
If Iām not adding the grave of someone to the map out of respect for family, the area thatās an issue that is much wider and more human than just arguing over criteria or Menās Warehouse.
It seems odd to me to hold that sentiment for one thing in a cemetery but not apply it just to get another Wayspot 20 feet away at the grave of Lord Farqhuar-Smedley-Smodley-Smidley III upstanding British hero, opium trader
2 Likes
Oh, do you mean the clarification about the grave of Harvey Pekar? Thatās just a detail that was added because itās a grave of a notable person who died in the recent past. I donāt think youād have to worry about offending the family of a member of the British aristocracy who died in the 19th century in quite the same way.
In the document, itās mostly used as an example for how supporting information can be used to support a nomination in a sensitive location. Itās not intended to be a checklist for eligibility.
1 Like
No, the opposite.
Iām not worried about offending the family of old Empire opium traders most of them are still up to no good anyway 
The grave of x famous person is rarely on its own in a graveyard itās usually surrounded by other less famous people. The difference for me is not in the addition of the individual grave but in the addition of a Wayspot in that specific area, a cemetery, where there will be other mourners.
Iām either going to respect that or not. I donāt see it as a grey area like trail markers etc but more like schools and emergency services. Having criteria that says maybe itās ok or maybe not, use your judgement doesnāt really work.
Iād prefer them to be more direct and say yes or no and as itās dealing with an issue bigger than maps, portals and PokĆ©mon it seems like an easy choice to me at least.
3 Likes
I see now. Thanks for clarifying! I think it depends on locality. In my area, we have a cemetery thatās full of historic graves (and the graves of less famous people as well), but they are also not using that part of the cemetery for active burials anymore. I guess itās things like that that make me say āuse your judgement,ā but I can appreciate your perspective.
1 Like
Iām not against adding things in cemeteries. I find the non āfamousā graves just as interesting and like you say some of them are areas for walking through, visiting*
*If you are ever here and hear the tour guides saying The Covenanter prison is where Dementors are from please push them down a big hill.
https://www.edinburghexpert.com/blog/edinburghs-graveyards-greyfriars-kirkyard
2 Likes
1 Like
Either in a separate section or in the Generic/Non-Generic business section could we get a clarification posted about businesses that promote exercise? (One guess what kind of nomination of mine was just rejected as a Generic Business.)
There was a post on the old forum which I canāt link now which read:
āFor the last line āShould a Dance Studio or Gym be judged like a Restaurant? Or should it be judged like a Baseball field or trail marker? Which is the more apt way to look at business that people exercise on site?ā - Gyms/Dance studios/etc. business promoting exercises need to be reviewed as a place of exercise which is an eligible spot.ā
That statement was made in 2021, and people still reject fitness businesses.
6 Likes
Yes I would like clarification. I have rejected fitness businesses, well only the chain locations. But I have come across a lot of them. Who knows if I am doing that correctly or not. Dance studios etc I look to see if they are adult only locations or only geared towards kids. Although, I have come across many youth centre locations while reviewing nominations.
1 Like
Now that you mention it, yes, thatās another one to add to my fairly short list of things I was surprised not to see mentioned.
The others I was surprised or disappointed not to see covered (because people find them confusing for various reasons) were these:
Overall, though, love your work @NianticTintino and Iām grateful to all the ambassadors who helped inform and attain clearer wording for the existing clarifications (Iām quite sure I can see some ambassador influences in some of the wording) 
I was pleasantly surprised to find this sorely needed section when I dropped by the forum looking for something else today 
8 Likes
Ok, just noticed that thereās no Neighborhood/Subdivision/Apartment Complex Signs sectionā¦May want to add that in the futureā¦
4 Likes
PLEASE address HOW to reject the things which should be rejected as well. We do not have an option to select āDoes not meet criteriaā as a rejection reason.
Unless it is clearly a āGeneric businessā a lot of these are difficult to find an appropriate rejection reason for.
11 Likes
Defitely agree that this is needed, even better would be proper reasons that can fed back to the submitter as have been requested for ages.
2 Likes
The questions around issues of voting and feedback reasons that are useful has been raised.
It was not part of the remit of this document which was focussed on criteria.
3 Likes
Thank you for this response. It does no good to say we shouldnāt accept something if we canāt reject it. I do believe that the correct rejection reason belongs with the description of the criteria.
3 Likes
All of these throughout this thread are being logged for now.
You did include one example which no longer applies.
The swimming pool section shows that community type pools can be eligible as social spaces.
The general criteria states clearly that a gated/restricted community can have eligible objects/places within it.
So pools can be eligible in gated communities.
As with all nominations a case should be presented.
1 Like
I did think it seemed intended that way, but itās not exactly specific enough to make those with years of prior knowledge of the ābecause Niantic said soā rejection reason on those stop using it 
Despite thinking the original ruling was illogical, I, myself, havenāt been comfortable with voting at all on those nominations recently because there hasnāt been an official announcement of a criteria change, despite some community assertions.
If youāre saying that is indeed the intent Niantic is communicating behind closed doors, thatās good to know, but it wonāt disseminate easily, especially for those who donāt use the forums. If the statement isnāt clear and concrete enough to point others to as an update or clarification, then Iām not inclined to try to use it to convince anyone else, personally 
Iām sure you know what Iām saying 
1 Like
It does often seem that there is a lot discussed and decided internally that is never actually disseminated to the people that need it. It makes everything feel so disjointed and unprofessional. Even the official team send conflicting messages and the appeals section donāt seem to understand half of the criteria properly.
Wayfarer and the Lightship map are the foundation of one of the biggest and most profitable mobile games in the world (and others), its insane to think the Niantic are unwilling to put proper resources into a team to mange it properly and communicate well.
3 Likes