Confused muchly
I dont understand ur description edit.
I think we may need to see the photos for this one. It is confusing when temporal (time) factors are in play.
What will an explorer see at the old, original location? If there is a sign, plaque or dedication stone and it features prominently in the main photo, reviewers will likely accept the historical submission.
It tends to work better to say that a site-change or refurbishment happened at a particular date, rather than ‘old’, ‘new’ or ‘current’. With any luck, your description will remain in play for years to come. Perhaps the theatre will continue to grow and expand or change location again.
2 Likes
It could also be grammatical errors. Like other commenters have said, the description is somewhat confusing, but this is how I would write the piece:
The Leatherhead Theatre was originally located here, but due to expanding interest and limited space, the theatre was forced to relocate to a larger location around the corner.
1 Like
This would only be an acceptable edit if the poi is an historical plaque showing where the site used to be. If the Wayspot being edited was for the Theatre, but it is no longer there, a location edit should be done, not a description edit to say that.
I had looked at this a little bit when first posted. I don’t think it was the Wayspot for the Theatre, because that has a fantastic description.
I did look it up, there is a plaque and it has no description. I’m fairly sure that’s what this edit relates to and not the actual theatre like you’ve showed in your post.
ty! i didn’t see one - the only plaque i saw also had a description. i didn’t look very long. and the op hasn’t been back to discuss.