Does the satellite map affect your decision? Mine it does, if not on the map i just decline
Hi @Nekowizardtv
Welcome to the forum 
Iāve moved your topic to Review Support because your discussion is about reviews, correct?
1 Like
Not everything has to be visible on the āsatelliteā view. Some things are too small, some things are on walls, some things are under trees etc.
The expectation is that reviewers will use a combination of the āsatelliteā images, streetview, google maps, the location of the waypoint, the supporting image and anything else available in order to validate the existing of the submission and the accuracy of the marker.
Sticking just to āsatelliteā images is a little bit inflexible.
15 Likes
There are 3 options to choose from when answering the questions in review.
absolutely fine
not ok
I donāt know (IDK)
This is the choice you can select if you are not sure.
So when trying to decide if something is there or not you can pick this if you think it is likely to be at that location. So for example it might not be visible on satellite view, the supporting photo gives enough information to make you think it looks about right, but you are not absolutely sure then IDK is a good choice.
It doesnāt need to be perfect, it needs to be good enough.
5 Likes
Remember that satellite (and street) view can be way out of date. Use a combination of satellite view, street view, and the supporting information (photo and links that back up the submitterās claim) to try to decide if something could possibly exist where it has been submitted. In the previous review flow that used a 1-5 star scale, there was an instruction that if we could not see something on the map but the location was plausible, we should rate it 3*. I think this more or less equates to the āI donāt knowā rating. Only reject as an inaccurate location if you have confirmed that it cannot be there.
6 Likes
I think sometimes that is too generous. People make fake submissions (e.g., stealing photos from existing wayspots) and put the marker somewhere that isnāt visible on streetview. It may not be possible to confirm that it isnāt there, but you will often have a suspicion that it isnāt. What level of confirmation are you saying is required?
If it could reasonably exist based on the evidence presented, then donāt reject for inaccurate location. If something is fake, reject it as fake.
Did you read the rest of my comment? It is on the submitter to convince you it is there. The OP was saying they only use satellite view and reject if they canāt see it there. That one sentence is out of context.
1 Like
We seem to be generally agreed on the opās position. That sentence stood out to me, which is why I plucked it out. You have a good point - rejecting for inaccurate location when it is quite likely a fake and doesnāt exist at all is the wrong rejection.
You definitely need to read the entire submission. I sometimes submit things that canāt be seen on satellite. When I do, I discuss that in the supplemental. I explain how to use the information I have given you in the 2nd photo to prove that the nomination really exists in that location. Itās very frustrating when I provide good proof but people ignore that and just reject because they donāt want to use their brain to understand the location.
7 Likes
This is also how I always understood the location aspect of the review.
If you are submitting and the wayspot isnāt visible on Google but is visible on Bing or some other service, you can include a link to that in the supporting text. If you have a good street address with the submission, you can check Bing or whatever while reviewing. Iām not a fan of Bing overall, but often the satellite imagery is better.
I have to admit that I do not like this comment even if I am taking it out of context. It seems that certain types of waypoint sort of get a āget of of jail freeā card.
āI canāt confirm it is there but it could beā just isnāt enough for me so I tend to āSkipā. I am happy to let others decide.
I very rarely use the āI donāt knowā mainly as I am unaware how this counts towards the final result. It seems to be the same as āSkipā as āJust ignore this as I donāt knowā. Accept / Reject are obvious but what happens if the majority vote āI Donāt Knowā?
We donāt know, and we probably shouldnāt know.
I use āI donāt knowā for similar reasons than Cyndiepooh but Iām sure we could debate schematics. Part of it can be personal comfort, intuition, context clues, or even personal knowledge in some cases Iāve reviewed.
Thereās probably another discussion we could have on the state of Wayfarer and how we seem to assume the worst and āguilty until proven innocent.ā I also know Iāve āIDKāedā and later regretted it.
āI donāt know if itās there. I donāt know if itās not there. It makes sense to me that it could be, and context clues including building style or other clues that point to this location. Iāll use the IDK.ā
maybe it is because i am in the states. āinnocent until proven guiltyā is how our courts operate. or are supposed to.
1 Like
Thank you! Yes It was about reviews
1 Like
That is perfectly fine when we are talking about crime and the chance that you could be ruining someoneās like but we are talking about placing a dot on a game map.
We all know how āAcceptā or āRejectā is counted so I donāt see any problem with knowing how āI Donāt Knowā is counted.
āinnocent until proven guiltyā Thatās criminal courts. Civil courts and other non-criminal settings have a lower burden of proof - balance of probability (or something like that)
I think wayfarer reviews should be considered more like civil matters than criminal matters.
Let me make my reply to this statement perfectly clear. A nomination does not have to be rejected just because you cannot see it on satellite view. The submitter can give other convincing evidence that the nomination exists where they say it does with the supporting photo and external links. I consider all evidence presented. If it is reasonable that the point of interest could exist there, it is reasonable to use the āI donāt knowā option on the location instead of outright rejecting.
5 Likes
Hi @Nekowizardtv
Iāll give you an example of my nominations (because I needed the screenshots for a yesterdays post) to show what the others here are talking about:
The callestic station is the poi.
Itās brand new so not on satellite.
Itās in a āsports parkā so not reachable by the streetview car.
But the building in the background is a long standing one and visible on satellite. I made sure to explain the whole situation in my supporting informations.
6 Likes
