I came across a edit review for location moving, but what caught my attention is the picture that has two people in it. I suppose it is an already aproved wayspost with everything and stuff, because it is just a edit review. But there is no place in the “report” button I can use to say about the picture, only about the misuse of wayspot edits and this is not the problem.
Having unidentifiable people not prominently in focus is not a reason to report a photo.
I really can’t see any identifiable faces or body parts in the photo, so I wouldn’t worry about it. If you can see the faces clearly, that would be something to report. It’s really anything that could identify a person that would be of concern, and I don’t see that here.
Tittle/description/location edits do have a Report button that can be used, and there is a comment box where you can note any issues. Otherwise, you can always use the Report Abuse link at the top of the forums, or help chat on the Wayfarer website.
Again though, for this photo, I’d leave it be as I can’t see anything that would identify those in the photo.
@RoIi112 @DTrain2002 thank you for the answers. I get the point about the people being unidentifiable, but we have the option to click and see the larger image and sometimes this way they may be indentifiable. This kind of picture should not be reported, but is it ok to accept submissions with pictures like that? Or is just that the removal criteria is different from the admission criteria?
I would accept a nomination with a person that I can’t identify in the main photo, and have in the past. I also submitted some photos during the edits challenge with unidentifiable people in them, and they were approved without issue.
Can you identify these people, because I couldn’t when I zoomed in on my phone before submitting (their faces are too blurry)? Also, the pond overlook is what the Wayspot is for, so would the geese in the pond also be bad and make this ineligible? No, because the people and the geese are not the focal point, and the people can’t be identified.
I see it. I get confused because the guidelines says “face or bodyparts” and I don’t know how body parts without a face could identify a person so maybe that’s not the only problem.
I took “body parts” to mean like a thumb in the photo. And “face” to be identifiable.
There were help statements around which photos should be rejected that did use to read as “Includes people, body parts, or live animals” and then stop there where it was supposed to continue with “as the subject matter.” And now those places read, “Includes prominent people, body parts, or live animals.”
I can’t remember all the places the photo rejection reasons are listed, but if you find one that still reads as no people can be in photos, please let us know.
The former help tips on the Wayfarer site used to give examples of what was good and bad.
For this the bad example was a clearly posed photo of a person. That should be rejected.
For the acceptable photo, they chose a picture of the Eiffel Tower from a distance so as the whole tower filled the picture, but with lots of people around its base.
The Rejection Criteria section in Criteria on the Wayfarer website still lists this:
includes people, body parts, or live animals as the subject matter
Photo Guidelines both in the help center and Help on the Wayfarer website list these:
- Includes prominent people, body parts, or live animals
- Photos with recognizable faces or license plates
I take the recognizable faces more into account than a person who might have their back facing the camera. As for body parts, if I can see someone’s thumb in the photo or there’s someone’s leg next to say a statue, I might downvote that, mainly due to the composition of the photo, as those are not well-composed photos, which is the 2nd point of what makes a good photo in the guidelines:
- Well composed - the Wayspot or place marker is centered without too much foreground or background, or objects passing by in front
ty - this is exactly what i said it was supposed to say! i agree about faces.
In this second case would you mark as “low quality or inaccurate photo”?
Sorry, don’t quite understand what you mean by second case.
When you said that:
That would be Face or body parts along with low quality. I always choose low quality even if there is another reason. For example, if it’s a third party photo, I choose third party and low quality, just to be on the safe side.