Include the title, description, both photos, and supplemental information
Description:
Connection trail joining Neptune Road to Ravenscroft Place. Hike through Pachena Park and visit the Lookout on Pachena Place to view Swartz Bay area and terminal.
This area of North Saanich was a huge dead zone. There are connecting trails through this winding and steep area and a few local parks. This area is right by a great lookout which is likely to be accepted. This went into Niantic Voting and it was rejected.
Any suggestions would be helpful!
Oh there was a second rejection that also went to Niantic Voting.
You have 2 choices: appeal or resubmit. Since Niantic already looked at these nominations and rejected them, it may be hard to get them approved on appeal. You also only get 2 appeals every 20 days, which is another issue.
I really don’t see anything wrong with the submissions, other than east and west being capitalized in the 2nd description (they shouldn’t be, since they’re just the directions, not part of any name). The photos look good, and you even included a link to the trail in the supporting info.
However, both of the locations seem to be on or near private property when viewing them in Google Maps and Street View. This could cause an issue, since Wayspots are not allowed on private property. If you do resubmit, you may have to be a little more accurate with where you’re placing the map pin, as well as prove these aren’t on private property with your supporting info.
This is a difficult area to use for placement. If you are there it sticks my pin on the opposite side of the road, such as for my Hedgerow one, which was denied for “mismatched location” originally. I went back out and had to switch to map view. Satellite view is pointless there. Unfortunately, I need to go out again most likely to resubmit them. They are too far to do from home, as well the gps is a bit wonky, and the satellite view isn’t great. They were not rejected for private property though. Some of the trails are larger to allow horses. The larger pdf map explains where the trails allow horses to traverse. The municipality just went out and are repainting all the trail markers that faded as since I submitted this last time the marker was repainted. I accidentally appealed the wrong nomination the other day. I nominated something out there and went to upload it and it vanished into the void. So I went to appeal it, but appealed the wrong one. I actually appealed this hedgerow one accidentally. They denied that and then took the newer nomination, which I did upload prior to appealing into niantic voting. I don’t think that is a coincidence. Plus I have no appeals left anyway.
So from my OP the Pachena Park Trail Marker was approved from Niantic. Just not the Hedgerow one, also indicated above. I am not sure what to do. Some of the trails are wider such as this one to allow horseback riding, which is allowed at Green Park and the trails that run east/west to access Green Park, such as this one.
This would be the third nomination I will do for this particular trail marker. Any further suggestions?
Not sure if anyone can take a peek and let me know what you think. It was mentioned above about my capitalizing the direction or perhaps being too close to property.
I waited until my appeal was available and yes I probably should not have used it on this since it went to Niantic Voting the first time. The difficulty is in satellite view, meaning I cannot nominate from a distance and even then gps might be a bit wonky when I am out.
So it was rejected as above and then I appealed it. Atleast this time around they gave me a note.
I did explain that the trail is wider as used by horses and clearly indicated where it comes out on Cascara. It is part of the east/west trails to Green Park.
They didn’t have an issue with the location, accuracy etc. Just it is generic.
There is so much discussion on trail markers I don’t know where the final answer went. It is clearly laid out in the North Saanich Guide provided in my nomination for individual trails. So far this road has been the hardest to get approvals on. It is the closest to the Regional Park and furthest from Green Park where this trail system is part of. This is the only one that was rejected twice, not counting the appeal. However, the first time due to gps it was showing up on the opposite side of the street and labelled as mismatched.
Currently in this region I have 17 accepted and 4 in voting.
On another thread about a trail marker that was removed @NianticAaron wrote this:
So why was my trail marker denied when you say trail markers are eligible?
It went to Niantic Voting and was denied. Which didn’t make sense. I appealed it and again denied. This sounds like a blanket statement which likely should have been rephrased as “some are eligible” not all.
The first submission AI rejected for mismatched location due to poor placement on the opposite side of the road as the satellite is poor there.
I provided links in my submission.
Page. 24 - " A main east/west trail leads from Green Park to Horth Hill Park and a
network of shorter trails connects with roads throughout this area, allowing for a variety of walks of varying lengths. Green Park is a small jewel with two man-made ponds and an open meadow, which can be wet in the rainy season."
As stated in my original submission and appeal - this trail is found on Map D and leads from Green Park East/West to Horth Hill
This is why generic business needs to be removed from the rejection reasons, far too many people select it when they want tk sayd “generic”, confusing newer (and older) reviewers
Yes except you cannot say a sticker trail or regular post marker meets requirement and another doesn’t. Not all places can afford nice looking markers. They should accept them all or don’t. So a doesn’t meet criteria response would be just overused the same as “generic”.
My point is that on another thread, Niantic is reinstating wayspots or telling people to resubmit them for approval. Plus putting a blanket approval that “trail markers are eligible” yet not following that. I would have responded on that thread but it seemed better to state it here. Also, it is frustrating that I cannot list this under Wayspot Appeals as I am not trying to remove a current wayspot or reinstate one that was removed.
It was good for that OP as their submissions were approved. Yet Niantic reviewed mine and still rejected it, although I do think they deliberately pulled this one due to an appeal request that I accidentally put through.
Someone mentioned on another thread that if Niantic Voting and an appeal rejected it, sometimes we can post on the forum. Would this be under Wayspot Appeals ? I assumed it was for wayspot removals and or reinstatement.
This just bothers me. Wondering if I should be removing all the other similar wayspots out there I nominated that were approved? I have not submitted a trail marker since this appeal came back rejected for being generic.
Yes, if your valid portal was removed, post about it in Wayspot Appeals . From your Contribution page: click its primary photo, click again to open it in a new tab, copy that link. Paste into your appeal. Then Niantic will know exactly what you’re talking about.
No, don’t submit removals for existing valid portals. Even if you’re the one who submitted them in the first place.
Oh yes. Not what I meant. Turns out I am seeing many post on the forum about their wayspots being rejected on appeal even when they would normally meet criteria.
I don’t remove valid portals. It just makes no sense that close to 20 would be approved in the area, even one changed from rejected by Niantic to approved after a post on the forum, while another is rejected twice by Niantic through voting and appeal.
I have seen that. I also tagged them 5 days ago when they wrote a generic statement on another thread saying trail markers are eligible. You can see above that they were tagged and have not responded. So I doubt they will.
