Thanks for the appeal, Explorer! The object fountain in question does not meet the Wayfarer criteria as it is a normal object. We recommend you review the Wayspot Criteria before submitting your next Wayspot contribution: Wayfarer — Niantic Technical Support and Help Center
Rejection Criteria:
Generic Business
Wayfarer criteria
Description: A bubbling decorative fountain Supplemental Information: One of many decorative fountains and lakes that adorn the Lake Grove community. They all serve as landmarks to help players gather and meet!
I need help with this nomination. The rejection reason cites “Wayfarer Criteria”, but when looking at the link that was provided Eligibility Criteria — Wayfarer Help Center I am a bit conflicted.
Specifically, under the Eligibility Criteria it states that “Fountains and water features” are eligible.
The rejections also cite “Generic Business” as a reason, but I am having trouble figuring out how that applies to this decorative fountain located within this community. There are a number of fountains such as this and some decorative, man-made lakes that give the community its name. Are all of these considered “normal objects”?
For some reason, the reasons provided when Niantic staff review nominations often fail to match the subject. That is one of the improvements they have said they are going to work on, sometime.
If your nomination is for a feature on a private single-family residential property or duplex it is categorically ineligible. Even if it is in a public garden, you need to make a case for how it is not a run-of-the-mill natural feature and promotes Wayfarer requirements.
Would adding this fact improve any chances? Or would this still be considered not eligible? I mainly ask since I see that things such as apartment complex pools, playgrounds, and name signs are eligible and in-game.
My initial question still remains as well. Would a fountain like the one I posted be considered a “normal object”? Mainly asking since that was the wording used in the actual rejection text and not just the rejection reason “tag” if you will.
Id call it more of a waterfall or water feature but it is definitely something Id seek out - I love the sound of running water.
I would have voted for it under explore, it might be a tough one to get approved but I dont think its ineligible, its probably personal preference as to how cool you think it is - but I really like it.
I have been told that a national biking trail is just a normal sign of no significance by the appeals team too, so you never know when they’re following their own critieria or not
Just looking at the location on Google Maps, it does seem like you will need to include some information that this is at a multi-family residence, and it may be good to include Lake Grove in the title, not just the description. If there are more of these in the area, you may want to use descriptors, like a direction.
I think waterfall or waterfall fountain would also be good to include, as that better described what this is. These man-made water features aren’t uncommon these days, having the look of a natural water feature, so it really depends on how you sell it with the title/description/supporting info.
This type of fountain is definitely something I would find interesting to explore, but if the ML model and Niantic reviewers are rejecting that photo, I don’t know what else to suggest. Can you find an angle that is more obviously manmade? Is there a seating area focusing on the waterfall? A garden path leading to the feature? Maybe use the supporting photo to show more the accessibility of the area in the main photo rather than the course the water runs through the landscape since that does not look very pedestrian friendly?
Thank you all for the advice! I’ll take it all into consideration as I attempt to nominate this and the number of other decorative fountains and lakes within the same community.
It’s always a little confusing when the response as to why something was rejected isn’t very clear haha!
I’ll definitely keep lurking and reading the threads in the forum now, as I did learn a few things from the questions that others had.
Was the original rejection “the team” or “the community”?
It’s possible that AI kicked it out because it looks like just nature. Rocks and plants.
It’s probable that appealers looked at rejection information from the original review. And said yeah, that’s right. Especially if they live in a place without water features like this, and have never seen one.
I find it interesting that you got that reply from your Niantic appeal. I nominated a decorative fountain at a care home in my town. The community rejected it - but Niantic accepted it on appeal! So why was mine ok, but yours is rejected as a standard object, or whatever the text said?
The biggest problem we face is consistency. If Niantic themselves can’t be consistent, how do we expect the community to know what to be accept or reject?
Edited to add photo of my submission in case you can see anything that might help or differentiate!
I didn’t think to specify that this lake (and the fountain in the original post) are man-made, as they are in the middle of a community/city.
With that being said, is something like this truly not eligible? It doesn’t have a sign or anything, but the community is called “Lake Grove” and has three artificial lakes within. Thoughts?
Edit: This was submitted at the same time as the fountain in the original post, hence nothing mentioned in this thread being included
I was told recently on here that natural features are no longer ineligible as aren’t part of the restricted criteria anymore - I checked for myself and it definitely isn’t listed as something you can’t nominate (pretty sure when I started it said you couldn’t).
So if it’s been removed from the criteria, why is it still an option to use for rejection anyway? Yet another example of inconsistency and confusion.
