The Satellite view even shows the Pagola / Canopy in the respective spots.
https://www.google.com/maps?q=51.655643,-0.418923
I’ve appealed it, but am not going to be hopeful, but am wondering what I am missing here?
They were probably going for the “not distinct” reason rather than “temporary”. Personally I think it’s fine, aside from the fact it’s a “pergola”.
3 Likes
My spelling isn’t my strength, but could have been fixed at some point if it were approved.
Not sure why it’s not distinct other than there being 2 of them in close proximity. However, I was under the impression they would be acceptable as a place where people can socialise… I may need to revisit this criteria.
I think the not distinct judgment is where the community judgment comes in. It may be that reviewers didn’t think that this was convincing enough as a great place to socialize. To me, it’s a bit like why some restaurants are accepted in others aren’t. Some are more obviously great places to socialize, and others are more obviously places where socialization could happen, but it isn’t a really outstanding/interesting/notable place.
I’m not arguing one way or the other for your nomination just thinking about what reviewers might have been thinking when they judged it as they did.
1 Like
You might have a point, but I am hoping there are some circumstances where it does meet the criteria.
And you’re very experienced wayfarer. I think that’s really where the nomination improvement might come into play in terms of writing it so that reviewers are convinced that it truly is a great place to socialize.
I’m not that experienced. There’s a lot of people on here that would make me look like someone who should give up.
And my appeal has been accepted.
4 Likes