Ignoring whether this is eligible or not, I have some tips for future nominations.
-
don’t make game references in the description. That goes against the criteria. You’re nominating a wayspot that may be used in several games, not just Pokémon Go, and Pokémon Go is not at all relevant to describing your nomination.
-
on a similar thread, talking about pedestrian access in the description is not relevant. The description is to describe the nomination, not to talk about what criteria you think it meets. The supporting statement is where you should make your case that your nomination meets the criteria.
-
car parking is not typically relevant to nominations, as nominations are meant to be accessed on foot
Okay 
Hi @LuciferAyush
This nomination is a good improvement 
Can you find some informations about the wall art? In best case a link to an official website about it, or an article.
Than you should focus on that in your description.
I’d give it a second try with @hankwolfman tipps included.
Good luck 
Yes, I understand. I do some research about the art style and take picture of the art from a angle where road is visible. Please let me know is it good or should I change anything
Thank you everyone.
Provided this is your own text, this is great. However, just repeating the same description in the supporting text is a waste IMO. Echoing this advice:
If you want to do more for your description, you can describe this specific instance of Warli art before/after describing the artform as a whole.
oh yes you’re very close!
You can use your supporting info (it’s not requested to write a whole essay) to help clear things out to make it a easy decision for reviewers (and the ML as well).
In this specific case I’d say something about save pedestrian access (maybe mentioning that in your area pedestrian pathes look like this) and that this wall art fullfill criteria of exploration (cultural significant …).