First thing: most of my viable Wayspots got rejected by the community even if Niantic clarified that hiking trails are viable wayspots. In the last view weeks some of my nominations went to Niantic Voting. Most of the time my wayspots got accepted. But since a few days I got incorrect rejections even from Niantic employees. That shouldn’t be the case. I will provice one example. The rejection reason is even incorrect. I would understand a rejection if the sign is damaged or something like this but even then the reason could not be lacking uniqueness.
Wayspot Submission for Gräfenbergbahn-Weg - Symbol
Heroldsberg BY
Not Accepted
2025-06-18
Reviewers provided these top reasons for not accepting this submission:
The submission lacks uniqueness or historical and cultural meaning
Der Gräfenbergbahn-Weg ist nach dem gleichnamigen Verkehrsmittel im Raum nördlich von Nürnberg benannt. Die offizielle Weg-Nummer ist 206 bei einer Gesamtlänge von 19,7 km.
It isn’t at all obvious, but this rejection often doesn’t mean what it says and doesn’t mean what you have inferred. Rejection for not being “Permanent and Distinct” is selected for at least three reasons
The object is not permanent
The object is not visually distinct enough to identify
The object is not good enough to be a wayspot and the reviewer had to pick an explicit rejection - this is the best one to select when appropriate, safe and accuracy are all OK.
Then they pick the wrong reason cause you can select being not permanent. And why do most of the Niantic employees accepted these kind of wayspots since months and some reject them?
Each nomination is considered individually. A lot of the discussion around trail markers is that they be at “decision points” as is mentioned like this in the clarification:
From what you shared here, that does not seem to be a decision point. So maybe that is why this one was not accepted?
Perhaps you are right but then the rejection criteria is not correct. I just get the feeling that is total dependent on which employee will review your wayspot. I will look if I get an accepted wayspot that is similar to this.
Der Eckentaler Rundweg mit der Nummer 4 ist auch unter seinem Namen Rund um den Eckentaler Ortsteil Eckenhaid bekannt. Er hat eine Gesamtlänge von 9,0 km und ist veranschlagt mit einer Dauer von ungefähr 2 1/2 Stunden.
These trail markers are not automatic acceptances. If it is going to be rejected, the rejection reason selected is correct. This is a similar issue to the Netherlands, so maybe @AMG7070 will have input on this, as to why some submissions are accepted while others are not.
This is a interesting case, even for me with the amount of markers I have submitted.
Im not from Germany, but these markers look pretty similiar in function I would say.
This is the only thing I can give: I have seen a similiar case of a fellow wayfinder I know who submitted a trail marker pole, without the route name on it. It was rejected for the same reason as yours. (Not having a cultural or historical significance). I advised her appealing, but it was rejected again for the same reason even with the extra information and route link. For one last chance I told her to put it in the forums with the same evidence and it was finally accepted.
I think appealing is defenitely a great option still. If not accepted I suggest putting it on the forums to see if the decision will be overturned.
(Even if this marker is not located at a decisive point, I have had no trouble getting them accepted, ususally through the appeal, because the community hates these markers😅)
I think it defenitely has potential. I suggest going to the next step which is appealing.
First of all thank you for your post. I would like to agree with you that appealing is very helpful. I use 90% on my appeals for markers for hiking trails and 80-90% went through the appeal process. I even find it very helpful that a lot of nominations went directly to Niantic. And most of the time I get my nominations accepted. But I think there are a few employees even at Niantic that don’t know how to come along with hiking trails. To be honest I opened this threat with the hope that someone from Niantic would read it and of course to discuss is it here.
Since I have plans for so many appeals I will have to prioritize for which rejection I use my appeals.
Beeing at a decision point is certainly a plus for a wayspot, but not neccessary.
Important about the marker is that is permanent (wich those are, because they get replaced when Damaged and are very durable) and that it represents a recognizeable trail (has the name or a specificly linked sign for the trail on it and it needs to have a function, in their case to allow orientation on the trail. There are markers on longer stretches of the trail to assure hikers they did not miss a crossing and prevent the need to track back, those aren’t less important than decision points.
Also you shouldn’t submit a marker of the same trail in around 200 meters distance to the last one.
If the Marker can’t be seen on Streetview (and actually, even when) submit a trail map to prove the location is actually on the trail.
That’s the rulings i’m aware of. No guarantee for completeness or 100% correctness, but that’s the rules I follow and I get about 90% of my appeals approved, have much success with Niantic voting and also got some through here in the Forums due to the Help of Niantic Staff.
Thank you for all your posts here. I will see which rejection I try to appeal. Just to give you an update. Today I got more decisions from Niantic about my submitted hiking trails and nearly all got accepted. If you wish I can provide more examples. As I said before I think it is just inconsistency since hiking trail markers are perfect wayspots and give a value to players.
Hi,
Lots of great advice here.
Having an online trail map is really helpful.
I wasn’t clear where the idea about 200m was from? There is no rigid distance ruling between trail markers. As always each trail marker needs to be evaluated in conjunction with the trail route. The context of the marker is important.
I think it’s also worth mentioning apps such as GPSmapcamera to put the location on the supplementary photo. I find this very useful in tree covered areas. That information combined with the online trail route can dispel any doubts a reviewer may have about the location.
