Additional Information (if any): How can a work of art that is clearly decorative, that has artistic value, is permanent, grabs attention be rejected as a generic business and as a building element. This is not a fancy door handle, a blank painted wall, a 2x4 etc. it is a work of art. Murals aren’t anything more than the collection of skilled application of paint, typically on the wall of a building. Paint is one of the most basic building elements out there. However when done artistically it has value. Same with a chandelier. This is not a mass produced item. It is a unique piece of art. A chandelier in this case one made from blown glass, unquestionably an art form, that is placed in a location making it an ornate focal point of the room is arguably just as rare as a mural or any other statue at the entryway to a building. This is not a random light fixture installed in millions of homes that you go to IKEA or Home Depot and purchase by the case. Additionally this Chandelier is not a business, is not affiliated with the occupants of the building directly. It is in the foyer of the building, a common area to access other communal areas (bathrooms) and occupant’s individual suites. If this work of art is rejected as a generic building element does that indicate a change in criteria for decorative items?
Moving this to Nomination support as this is not a form of appeals the forum deals with. If you want feedback on what to improve, you can share your full nomination including, title, description and supporting information, to offer the best advice.
I’m not looking for support of the nomination, but thanks anyway. The rejection statement defies logic and it’s application invalidates thousands of waypoints and would indicate a change in the interpretation of the wayfarer criteria.
Hi,
It is always helpful if people wish to comment on whether the outcome statement to see the full information that the Niantic staff and reviewers look at.
As this submission centres round the artistic value of an object it is important to see the full information.
I appreciate the frustration you are feeling at this rejection, we have all felt this way at one time or another. It it’s important though to remember that each decision is applicable only to that specific submission. It does not have wider ramifications.
What evidence did you present that this was a work of art, and not just a decorative element? Did you provide the name of the artist or the title of the piece? The appeal reviewer said they needed “additional context” if you do try to resubmit.
Art is subjective, so the more you can do to prove this is a noteworthy piece of art as opposed to just something that is pretty will help a resubmit if you decide to do that.
I know some appeal rejections are reversed here on the forum, but those are when the rejection reason is clearly wrong, and I don’t believe this is the case here.
I feel the written out statement explains the “Wayfarer criteria” rejection. As to the other rejection reason, we have been told by Niantic that “Generic business” is not what the appeal reviewer is trying to convey:
I agree with Cyndie. I adore blown glass. But can you assure me that this isn’t just from some lighting company’s catalog? How do i know that this is a unique piece? As the submitter, it is your job to provide that context or proof.
I did a reverse image search on the chandler, and while I didn’t get an exact match back, there are several similar ones that are being sold online, many of which run for over $1000.
Like noted, you need to provide info that supports this as a unique work of art, and not a fixture that can be purchased online. Providing the actual title of the art piece and the artist’s name would be helpful.
I posted 2 pictures, a description and very brief supporting text. Pretty standard straightforward submission, Or so I thought. I failed to see the need for a detailed explanation proving that what caught my attention and prompted me to enter a building for a better look was in fact art not a random decorative element. The failure is mine I’m not blaming anyone else.
No I indeed can’t prove that. I have never attempted to with any other artwork I submitted that level of detail has never been required to prove something is art. Nor have I considered that a reproduction of the Mona Lisa on display somewhere wouldn’t be considered art. Maybe the creator made 100, 1000 or 1 I have no idea I have no expertise and any attempt to answer would be a fabrication. Thanks for taking the time to reply.
