This is quite a funny rejection for this 104 year old memorial, sculpted and engraved as a complete one off. I’m imagining it was reviewed largely by elves who were like “a life time of your kind is but a blink of an eye to an elf - temporary or seasonal”.
Either that or people who live somewhere with 104 year old sculpted and engraved memorial bird baths to historically important figures on every street corner. “Not another one!”
The private residence or farm is fair game though, during the second world war the grounds of this building were used to grow food by the Land Army to support the war effort, so technically around 80 years ago it WAS a farm.
Just to clarify that rejection reason is temporary OR not distinct. Which means that some reviewers might have considered this object to be not very distinctive. Which I can imagine based on the picture, however you added significant information in the supporting text.
and I can see it on satellite view. Is there a Wayspot within that portal circle that might be affecting how reviewers saw this? I am really baffled. But maybe i am looking at the wrong thing.
I agree, based on your picture it just seems like a regular birdbath. Your description provides a lot of context, but is there anything that would indicated actually is a memorial that you can include in the picture? I also agree that it is the not distinct part not the temporary part of that criterion that you probably are getting.
I think choosing not permanent or distinct is a popular way of people rejecting something they don’t think meets criteria.
II think it’s worth appealing
I think it is a distinctive birdbath.
Is there a plaque on it? I would take a close up of the plaque for the supplementary.
Satelitte view is so good and the main has plenty of background I think it’s would work well.
We’ve never gotten a great response from Niantic about whether giving social/exercise/explore all thumbs down will reject a submission, or if we do have to choose one of the other 4 questions for thumbs down.
I also think this is worth an appeal, as there is so much historical context, is permanent, and most likely distinct to the area.
Hi! Personally I would recommend trying to show how the structure on the photo is connected to the interesting person you describe in a more obvious way, right now the two sound quite disconnected if you can’t make the details on the rim out, which I can’t. Maybe the supporting info needs to be shorter and only include instructions on how to verify that claim? Your link is at a disadvantage if it comes after so much text.
Yes, but many asked questions about how to best reject, and many are still waiting on a full answer. There are reviewers that reject things as generic businesses, and they certainly aren’t.
Not the point of this thread, though. OP looking more for nomination support.
Can I just say that a lot of your posts don’t make a lot of sense here in the forums. I assume you may work mostly outside the forums, and I know @cyndiepooh mainly from here, and I believe most know what I’m referring to.
Again, not important to this thread, but try to be more concise; your posts often don’t make much sense here.
He tagged me because I almost always know where to find links to any comments made, and am almost always on. But I wasn’t last night, and @elijustrying knew where it was, too. And this is a direct reply to your comment
Because they most certainly have clearly said that we have to choose one of the other 4 questions to reject a nomination.
Im very familia with forums, although it may not seem so recently, i have been a major contributo in the past. Like Cyndie said, i was tagging her so that she could come reply here. And i used your message to direct her to the exact point she should look into.
And I know the AMA from then. It’s never been clear which of the 4 to choose, and there’s been a good number of Wayfarers coming and asking about their strange rejection reasons.
It’s confusing when a trail marker is rejected as a generic business, or a memorial bench for someone’s parent at a city park is rejected for sensitive location. Even still having temporary/seasonal in that rejection reason instead of not permanent can be confusing to those who never used the star rating system, which used temporary/seasonal more prominently than the current thumbs up/down/IDK.
Again, not the main point of this thread, other then to explain to the OP about their rejection reasons. Private residence makes no sense, as this is at a university near the business school there; I highly doubt reviewers fully know the WWII farm history of the location. And temporary/seasonal again confuses.
Sorry for confusing some of you, that wasn’t my intention.
In fairness that’s compromising the quality of the database/portals to try and second guess bad reviewings. The portal photo could be a close up of the engraved rim of the bird bath, but then the photo in the games isn’t of the bird bath itself. And it wouldn’t be a great photo. The supporting also clearly directs the reviewer to a weblink showing that proof.
I don’t know if in submission the photo quality is compressed? But on my original photo you CAN see the engraving if you zoom in.
Its understandable someone might have doubts its real. Its exceptionally bad reviewing to neither click to expand the photo nor to check the additional proof provided via a web link that addresses those doubts.
This does not solve your immediate problem of getting this accepted and combating bad reviewing but if you can take an overhead photo of that in 1:1 size with 20% side borders,
At least in terms of a glorious spinner photo IMO. It would still be the object, shown from a different perspective.
Look, it’s advice, it’s not binding arbitration You either way always have the last word and full control over what you put in your nomination. We here are trying to provide the external perspective of someone not from the area who would review this as a nomination and not see something as immediately clear. It’s neither personal nor complacent, and similarly maybe you can forgive me for not making out the letters on the birdbath at the resolution of the screenshot that was originally provided, my eyes are indeed not the best. I can see it better on the fuller res photo you shared in the post.
While we do not condone poor reviewing, we need to be realistic about the average reviewer and about the amount of effort they are willing to make on expanding photos and reading long supporting texts. This is not to denigrate the huge work of the reviewing community at large, but you will lose people every step of the way. From personal local experience, often universities will be mistaken for schools, similar but not identical objects will be mistaken for duplicates, permanent objects will be marked as temporary… etc. And then there is the fact that the onus is on the submitter to make things as clear, visible and readily accessible as possible. So we often need to work on making our nominations bulletproof even though we “shouldn’t need to”, because everything that can potentially be taken the wrong way will be taken the wrong way. And sometimes making things bulletproof involves being concise.
My view is that as I said above, yes your link is there, but realistically the average reviewer will not even get to it at the bottom of the supporting information field. I would work on making it more concise as I think some information in it is superfluous, namely whatever was already said in the description, and that can result in losing readers along the way. It’s just a suggestion, like in any type of peer review.
You either way always have the last word and full control over what you put in your nomination. We here are trying to provide the external perspective of someone not from the area who would review this as a nomination and not see something as immediately clear. It’s neither personal nor complacent, and similarly maybe you can forgive me for not making out the letters on the birdbath at the resolution of the screenshot that was originally provided, my eyes are indeed not the best. I can see it better on the fuller res photo you shared in the post.