Hello! I would like your opinions on submitting my very first pokestop in a place that barely has any! I took pictures of the location, but I don’t know which would be better for a nomination; it is a cycle path that goes through a forest and has a generic trail marker of 3 walking signs. It also has a sign indicating the number of the path—cycle route 47–which goes through a forest that is owned by someone, but the path itself is free for all as the sign indicates. I also wasn’t sure if the last picture I took is a good one for the second required picture so thought I’d ask for your opinion. I’m also not entirely sure how to go about registering further information about the trail—do I need to research the cultural significant or history of the place prior to submission?
Thx! 
If I was summiting a trail I would focus in the description on what people use the trail for i.e. dog walking and what you might see like farm fields, distant city, views etc. might even mention what roads or areas it connects
In the reviewers notes, I would mention the route number and a link to the local footpath path map (PROW), I would empathize exercise and exploration
Hello and Welcome @DragonRoaria
It’s a great idea to get advice and we are happy to help.
First make sure you read this:
No submission is a gimmie 
it is up to the submitter to make the case for each submission. Put in the effort and you are more likely to have success.
Don’t worry about things like who owns the forest etc in the U.K. you are ok.
It doesn’t matter that the signs are simple you are nominating the trail/ route. It is the route that is interesting not the marker. So present an interesting route.
The NCN 47 marker should do well.
Make sure the title is specific for example NCN47 marker Holly Lane
Have the description say something about NCN 47 length, start- finish, and something specific about this section - what will people see a nice walk across fields between villages, nice view that sort of thing.
In the supporting info you can add a link to the sustrans webpage for 47. If it is visible on streetview say so, if it’s not explain how someone can verify the location from what they can see. The supporting photo needs to show the actual sign with enough of the surrounding area to help with that task of verifying.
The PROW can be trickier
This is a great resource you can use it to check the official number of the route. Every PROW has a distinct set route clicking on it on the map will bring up the details Use this information. I put the official numbers in the supporting information.
Then take the same approach as outlined for the NCN 47, for title description supporting. Your example is good as it is clearly at a decision point for which way to go in order to follow the route so a good anchor point.
A PROW that is a short passage between houses is not likely to meet the criteria of explore but one that takes you on a longer interesting route can fulfill that criteria.
Sorry this is so long there is a lot to absorb. But if you get it right it becomes easier.
Please feel free to ask more.
The NCN markers are for a named trail so make a good submission. The footpaths markers (PROW) are in the countryside, so also make a good submission.
Make sure they have good titles, good descriptions and supporting information (I can’t give better advice on that than elijustrying). My experience is that my PROW wayspots in the countryside are almost always accepted, but ones leading away from roads (even extremely quiet roads, in the countryside, not suburbia) are 50/50. However, when reviewing, I struggle to accept ones that simply say “It’s a footpath.”
Those footpath markers are very common, there’s no indication that they are a walking trail. Without evidence I would vote to reject. A cut-through through a field is not a walking trail, it’s just a muddy shortcut.
I would recommend looking for named walking trails, the LDWA site allows you to search for long-distance walking trails in an area - Search for Path - many of these will be trailmarked, they make excellent submissions.
NCN markers are good ones, but sometimes they can be not distinct if they are just small repeaters along the route. Markers at “decision points” are good, i.e. where the trail turns. The one you submitted looks like an excellent candidate, but as others have said you should give a good description. Also don’t confuse the NCN markers with local council bike trails which are also often numbered but in different colour, these local trails can also be acceptable but make sure the title is accurate.
It’s been a long time since Niantic came out and said that regular footpath markers, not just named trails, made good submissions. This was done in response to someone attempting to force Niantic to say once-and-for-all that regular footpath markers were not acceptable, so a lot of people (including me) were surprised to find Niantic clarifying their position the other way. It was on the old site so no longer available, but this is what Niantic said:
“Please check our stance on the below scenarios:
a) A marker with the trail name on the trail ← Excellent
b) A marker with the trail name on a street ← Good
c) A marker with no trail name on the trail ← Good
d) A marker with no trail name on an open green space area ← Good enough
e) A marker with no trail name on the street ← Not Good”
[my highlight[
This has since been solidified into the acceptance and rejection criteria, with example photos showing regular footpath markers that are not named trails.
The wayspots I submit, in the countryside, that are just regular footpath markers, get accepted - not just at footpath junctions like this one. I always make sure they have a good title and a description of where they take people.
Some people will always reject trail markers like this, but the overwhelming majority of reviewers will accept them.
A Public Right of Way marker does not mean that it is a trail. In the US they don’t have the same PROW network that we see in the UK, where the footpaths themselves are hundreds of years old or even more ancient and predate the road network. The fact that they might be old does not make them special.
I can actually see three of these from my front door. They’re not notable at all, and none of them are wayspots.
I don’t share that old guidance any more. It does explain why some things were accepted that aren’t now, but I go by the current clarification.
Thank you everyone for all your help! This is my very first submission so I would just like to make sure I do it right, as the people in this area barely have any pokestops.
So, if I write the following information, would that be acceptable as a strong submission in your opinion?
Title: NCN 47 Marker Celtic Trail West
Description: the marker starts near the home of Jac Tyisha, leader of the Rebecca Riots in Llannon, and is a great place for exercise or walking with family, dogs and pushchairs. The path goes through woodland alongside the Gwendraeth Valley, giving stunning views across the whole valley, which leads to Sandy Water Park on the coast on the outskirts of Llanelli, approximately 11 miles from the trail marker. You will also pass a steam railway Heritage Center on the former Cynheyidre Colliery site, about 6 miles past the sign and 3 miles further on you will pass the Swiss Valley Reservoir, which is accessible from the path.
Additional information: This part of the route is an asphalt path with no traffic access except for bikes.
PROW code 33/22/5. https://cycle.travel/route/summary/432
As long as that is your text and no copy-pasted, then that is fine - make sure it fits into the text-limit though.
@cyndiepooh @shritwod Please check Trails & Markers, particularly the fourth image, which is of a regular UK footpath marker that is not a named trail. @elijustrying already posted this. This is not old guidance, but current official guidance and is what I referred to above with “this has since been solidified…”
(I no longer reference the narrative I quoted in supporting texts, since it is out-of-date, but @shritwood was saying they would reject standard footpath markers, so I was showing the history of the Niantic decision.)
I am talking about what is currently being accepted by reviewers. @DragonRoaria that footpath marker photo is good, unless it’s next too close to the the NCN markers.
the way you phrased the comment read like the giffard scale is now canon, and it is not. the current clarification is all that is needed.
PROW are eligible.
There are examples in the criteria clarification that show they are eligible. Each is distinct, has a defined route and is officially recorded with a number.
The second step is if a particular submission is acceptable.
That is where it is a judgement call on whether what has been presented is good enough. You only reject if poor /inaccurate.
To repeat a simple marker acts as the anchor point at that location for the trail/route. The focus is not on the marker.
If my description only said public footpath marker (as I do see) and the support say more or less the same, then this would probably be rightfully rejected.
This was accepted as I made a description that demonstrates how it meets the criteria of explore and exercise. Further details in the supporting.
What I am doing is following the criteria clarification.
It all comes down as with any wayspot backing up what it is and not pretending it’s something it’s not.
I have submitted quite a number of NCN markers. I like to describe the route, or talk about the trail in general. I dont say a lot in supporting, just that it encourages exercise and exploration on a safe shared trail for walkers and cyclists.
For public rights of way, you dont necessarily need a named trail (it will technically have a name/number), but you do need to describe the route and why its a cool place to exercise or explore. Here’s one I submitted recently. My supporting here was mainly talking about how to find it on satellite.
I think both your routes can be acceptable. Hopefully seeing a couple of accepted examples helped.
Hi, what a lovely sounding route.
The only change I would make is at the first couple of words.
It’s the route that starts not the marker.
Please don’t be put off by the discussion we are having around this. There are judgement calls to be made and It demonstrates the need for effort on behalf of the submitter.
I hope this goes well for you. Adding wayspots in a rural locations is a great thing to do.
Sorry I did mean to say that I would put the part about exercise and push chairs in the supporting statement.
I’ve made the submission a few days ago and even upgraded it after reviewing many others; hopefully it gets picked up for voting soon—though I don’t believe this area has many voters. Thx for all your help in giving me confidence to submit my first nomination!
If ur submission takes too long, you can upgrade it for faster approval(this also depends on your area) but lately things in my country are getting approved withing few weeks.
The pokestop was approved and added to the game. Thank you everyone for all your help!