The pokestop on the park border refers to the entire park.
I have recently reported the gym equipment pokestop and the tennis table as duplicate playground items and they got rejected. I have already ran into problems appealing other pokestop rejections to reports i’ve made and it was due to not knowing well enough what can be a pokestop and not, so i’m trying to learn. I have the following questions:
Do the playground, sports/gym equipment and the tennis tables not seen as one pokestop, despite being in the same park? And if not, why?
There are two tennis tables, and also two separate gym equipment zones but there is only one pokestop per table/ equipment zone, why is that? Shouldn’t there be a pokestop for each separate elligible thing? Or is it applicable only to the first nominated and accepted pokestop spot of each kind in the same zone/area/park?
2.a If there should be only one pokestop per kind of elligible pokestop item per park, should the pokestop image/title ideally include both identical items and be called “tennis tableS” instead or just the first elligible pokestop item of its kind and it’s photo?
This park has many regular benches you can sit on. But many other parks around here, besides the items present in this one, have pavilions, like this one
is this considered more than a bench, even an elligible pokestop? If yes, and the park had two of them, would only the first nominated be elligible, just like in the case of the tennis tables and gym equipment zones mentioned above?
No they are not. There is enough distance between them to consider them unique points of interest, and each is valid in their own right. Just because a point of interest is located inside another point of interest doesn’t mean it’s not eligible.
You’ve hit on one of the great debates of Wayfarer. I will address each separately. The outdoor sports equipment on the right could be considered two separate points of interest as there is a grassy area in between them that separates them making them two separate areas.
The two ping pong tables appear to be on the same “dirt?” are and could be considered one poi, there’s also a significant area between them so some might consider them two separate poi’s.
2.a Yes, if you are encompassing several items inside a single nomination it would be proper to pluralize the title.
That is eligible, yes. It’s akin to a gazebo or a pergola. A great place to be social.
Thank you, so if only one of two nearby identical elligible pois gets accepted, should the photo, title and even location (so somewhere in between them) include both, or should every pokestop only include one item at a time?
When in doubt, submit one item per Wayspot. I hate when someone submits “Park, Playground, and Pavilion” combination type Wayspots.
However, if I am submitting something I know I am not going to try to submit separately, then I will use the plural. For example, I will submit a set of “tennis courts” when they are fenced in together. Although some will argue that each court is eligible separately, it feels like one destination to me.
Keep in mind that you are submitting WAYSPOTS not Pokestops. The reason this is important is that other games use this map of Wayspots. The game Ingress has much less restrictive inclusion rules.
So when a Pokemon player makes the decision that “only 1 of Pokestop will show up in my game so i will name it for ALL THE THINGS,” they are limiting what Ingress players can then have in their game. Even if just the table tennis will show up in PGO, only name the wayspot Table Tennis so the Ingress player cam come behind you and nominate the other things.
Nominations are game agnostic. Currently accepted items can go to a mix of 5 games depending on the unique inclusion rules of each of those games. So just consider the item(s) on their own merits.
It is sometimes a judgement call. If things should be nominated individually or as a set. The ping pong tables in your park - I might have mentioned both in a nomination but it is still acceptable to pin closer to on than the other. Similar to the tennis court example @cyndiepooh mentioned.
Let me see if I can explain it better. What I’m mostly trying to get you to think about is more than PGO when you’re nominating.
I have seen a lot of PGO nominators name something “Swimming Pool and Tennis Courts” because in their mind only 1 wayspot will show up in the game, so why not nominate both of the things that are in that 1 wayspot together? But on the map, those are two distinct items. So nominate them as different things. As a PGO player, you may choose to only nominate one of them because your game will only use one. But don’t ruin the map by lumping things together that wouldn’t be used at the same time.
Just because something can be a wayspot does not mean it should be a wayspot. And while it may be my preference, it is not how I always process things.
If the only thing a park has in it is a playground or a pavilion, how does it help to have two spots?
If nested spots serve the same goal (exercise), are they both worthy of being wayspots? I’m difficult to convince on that point.
And I still think the above, even after just rereading the following:
People can go to a park that has a playground and not use the playground. People can go to a park that has a pavilion and not use the pavilion.
There are other ways to use a park.
I don’t understand wanting to restrict how many Wayspots a park has. The playground is a point of interest, the pavilion is a point of interest, and the green space is a point of interest.
I agree with Cyndie. Niantic seems to prefer that we play in parks. So then it doesn’t make sense to artificially limit the number of wayspots provided to the community in parks.
I think highlighting individual items within the park ie tennis court, swimming pool, basketball, nature trail helps people explore the area better since it tells you if the park is interesting/good for playing ball games/ has seating places etc. So I think its important to add all the waypoints separately where it makes sense to do so.
