Unfortunately, a dream is all it will be for now anyway. By the time they have written that PoGo will be beamed straight in to our brains. No need for mobiles, the chip we had injected does it all 
Wayfarer is a fun way to convince the reviewers of the interesting, beautiful, and fun things you find in two images and some text. I understand the desire to increase the number of Pokéstops as soon as possible, but I think it will change if you start by enjoying Wayfarer itself.
2 Likes
With all the grey areas, yep, this may continue to be a dream.
And yes, I also got one of those memorial tree plaques for review, and rejected it. The trail there is littered with Wayspots for memorial tree plaques. Might just fill out the abuse form and see what respond I get back.
1 Like
I think they need to work on making sure the people submitting understand the rules more than changing the system itself.
I see a lot of otherwise valid submissions where the users beg for the stop to be approved in the description or supporting section, which leads to the stops being declined. Ive found thats one of the most common reason waypoints are declined when i chat with other reviewers!
1 Like
Hello and welcome,
This boils down to education, really, something we’d like to see improved upon. This issue is mainly due to the wording in PoGo when nominating, as it says you are submitting a nomination for a stop, not a Wayspot. This is something that has been talked about a lot, and many would like to see changed, since not all approved Wayspots become stops/gyms due to the density rules, but instead may become Power Spots from time to time.
Also, I personally don’t reject a nomination if they ask for a stop in the supporting info, since that doesn’t get included in any of the games; I think most here tend not to reject if any game terms are mentioned in the supporting info for this reason. Most times they say things like, “I think this would be a good stop,” etc, and after that they typically are providing supporting info as to why the nomination is eligible. So, for example, if someone says that they think a new gazebo at a park would make a good stop because social events can happen there, well, to me, I’m ok with.
If they do ask for a stop/gym in the title/description or mention game terms, like how the nomination is a great place for Trainers to play, then I’ll most likely reject it. Exceptions may be something like a trading card shop that sells Pokemon cards and other merchandise, so mentioning Pokemon in the description is fine.
Influencing reviewers falls under a grey area as well, as most aren’t actually saying in the supporting info to upvote their nominations, but that they think their nomination would make for a good stop. If they ask for their stop to be approved or to upvote it, that’s more in line with influencing than someone saying why they think their nomination would make a good stop.
Again, this comes down to Wayfarer doing a better job of educating users, especially those new to Wayfarer. Some improvements have happened, such as the new landing page with links to some of the help topics, but most agree that more needs to be done.
3 Likes
Voila @DTrain2002, c’est exactement ca le problème que je soulevais et mon ressenti profond et désagréable.
vous dites que vous avez refuser une plaque commémorative qui en tant que tel est tout à fait admissible, peut importe sa couleur, sa forme, le nombre de plaque … simplement parcequ"une plaque est une plaque !!!
le motif de votre refus est “trop de plaque” en gros : où avez vous vu dans les critères que “trop de quelque chose” est un motif de refus, ou bien quelque chose m’a echappé ce dont je m’en excuse …
et vous voulez de surcroit remplir un formulair d’abus ??? je trouve que c’est vous qui abusez cette personne n’a rien fait de mal.
il en va de meme pour les refus de plusieurs panneaux qui signalisent un parcours, au pretexte qu’ils sont identiques et rapprochés, si vous enlevez les trois quarts des panneaux les gens n’arriveront jamais a suivre le parcours et le l’objectif est le parcours !
bref c’est bien ce que je soulevais ici, certains evaluateurs se sentent investi d’un pouvoir divin sur les joueurs qui proposent des choses, je ne dit pas que c’est votre cas DTrain2002, mais avouez qu’il n’y a pas mort d’homme à avoir 15 plaques commémoratives qui se succedent si ces plaques sont interessantes et apprenent des choses !
en attendant votre message me fait comprendre pourquoi certaines de mes propositions sont refusées alors que d’autres du meme styles sont acceptées !
a partir du moment ou un style proposition est acceptée et de qualité, peut importe le nombre de ces propositions, je n’ai vu ecrit nul part dans les critères que c’etait un motif de refus !!!
1 Like
I do not reject anything for there being “too many” in a certain area; I reject based off of the criteria and any clarification. I have submitted nominations fully knowing that, if approved, they’re already in an occupied L17 S2 cell, so they would be a stop/gym in PoGo, but they may get used as a Power Spot. Also, I just like adding interesting POIs to the map, even if in an area that is already dense.
Memorial tree plaques fall under the same criteria as memorial benches, which is they are ineligible unless they are for someone of importance to the community, and the submitter must prove this importance. Nothing in this nomination, or in the other accepted plaques there really had anything of value; most were just memorial trees that families and/or friends purchased to remember a loved one. I have no idea who’s mom this is for, or if she was of importance to the community, as nothing was provided by the submitter, so the burden of proof wasn’t proven.
Here is the criteria clarification on memorial benches, if you haven’t seen it yet:
Also, @cyndiepooh was the first to bring up that one of these memorial tree plaques was received while reviewing, and I think she’d agree that the burden of proof was not met.
Trail markers are not something I have ever nominated, and I go off of the clarification here in the forums when reviewing them, too. I am aware of issues with trail markers in certain parts of the world, as some aren’t actual trail markers but regular street signs, or they were abusively nominated as being real but don’t actually exist in that location.
1 Like
The double standards that is being used.
Make its impossible to improve. Or enjoy wayfarer to its full extent.
To many grey area’s.
You dont may compare topics and ask why it get here restored and here removed while its almost the same, even if it dont fit any removal critiria it still can be removed.
If someone nominate a church or a playground its 99.9 % accepted there is no grey area.
Better rules and explanation of the guidlines on other objects will also help remove the grey areas on other objects.
And a more enjoyable wayfarer.
And in the end also a more playable game’s.
1 Like
Hence why many have asked for more clarification for different POIs that haven’t been fully clarified, but yet, we haven’t gotten them yet. So, they fall under the grey area, and we have to use our best judgement.
Much of what is being mentioned here in this thread has been mentioned in the past, such as better education, rewording of the nomination screens, more clarification, etc. Right now, all we can do is suggest ways to improve Wayfarer and hope that they get implemented in the future, and making suggestions is never a bad thing.
This is something I can’t say, as I have never nominated any trail markers. I think you have had several conversations with not only staff but the ambos and other users on this, and again, all we can do is ask. We cannot force any kind of change, just suggest it.
1 Like
I found the same recently when i tried to remove a commemorative bench which was removed months ago it got denied and we also have a church thats been gone for 5 years and a lidl has been there for 4 yet the gym is still there and it got rejected.
Hi @Barkey1988
Welcome to the forum 
Did your ingame reports failed or which way did you used? If yes you can appeal such rejections in the Wayspot Appeals category.
Or for more privacy use the form at the top of this forum.
I logged them via the app and got the notification and then appealed and still got a rejection via the wayfarer app.
You’ve made an ingame report of a removed bench, received the “reject your report” email and what happens after that?
Removal requests aren’t part of your contribution page so an appeal through “wayfarer app” isn’t possible.
I’m a bit confused now, sorry
1 Like
Hi,
Using the form is a good method as you can attach photographic evidence - geotagged to show what the place is like. Take some from different angles - I guess the bench might not be on streetview? But if it was a church demolished to make way for a Lidl there is a good chance it is on streetview.
1 Like
While there doesnt need tk be a rulebook, there defo needs to be consinstency between what appeal/removal reviewers do and the actual rules, like natural features are acceptable if tourist spots, but the appeal reviewers reject for natural feature (and then have the cheek to tell us to read the rejection criteria lol)