When submitting a Wayspot Appeal, make sure to include as much of the following information as possible:
-
Wayspot Title: Honden speelweide Homberg
-
Location (lat/lon): (51.809908,5.716754)
-
City: Wijchen
-
Country: The Netherlands
-
Screenshot of the Rejection Email (do not include your personal information):
-
Additional Information (if any):
This is not a designated dog toilet, the white sign clearly reads: Speelweide.
The city of Wijchen installs the blue “Hondentoilet” sign at every dog park so non-dog people are made aware there might be dog feces at these parks. In playground areas you are, by law, still required to pick up after your dogs. Since this is a place meant to socialize (with other dogs and owners) I think this makes it a suitable wayspot and the rejection was made with the wrong assumption on the functie of this park.
It would help to provide proof for that statement.
I have moved your topic out of the appeals category at that is meant for appealing reports and removed wayspots.
I don’t have any official statements on the city website, but there are multiple areas where these signs are next to public paths in city parks. These paths are often heavily visited by dog owners, and they are required to pick up after their dog everywhere, so it is like a feces warning sign. Designated dog toilets do exists, but those are always small fields without bins where dog owners do not have to pick up after their dogs. Those are so tiny dogs can’t run or play there and they are just meant for dogs to relieve themselves.
That is all is besides the point tough, my submission cearly shows in the main photo that this is a dog park/playground (hence the Speelweide sign) and not a dedicated dog toilet.
edit: I don’t think the nomination help catergory is helpful for this post, since I don’t need help figuring out why my submission was rejected. It was just rejected for the wrong reason, which is what I wanted to appeal
It shows conflicting information, that is why I asked for proof of that statement, to improve your nomination 
Dog parks like this should absolutely be eligible. They’re great places for both exercise (walking/playing with your dog) and socializing with other dog owners. It’s a clear fenced-off area with the sign as a perfect point of attachment to place the wayspot at. It checks all the boxes.
- Great place to exercise/socialize
- Is a permanent physical tangible object that placemarks an area
- Is safely and publicly accessible for pedestrians
- Contains accurate information in the title, description and photo
I see nothing wrong with this submission.
So basically the only way to improve it is to ask the city to remove the dog toilet sign? I had hoped my appeal would be carefully examined after it was rejected by the community for not being premanent/distinct (which is against the guidelines imo). Sure the Hondentoilet sign might be confusing at first but if you take into account the speelweide sign and the feces bin it should be clear this is a dog park. It wouldn’t make sense to put a bin like that in front of the dog toilet.
This is an example of the signs in a public park/green space. There is no fence, this is not a dog park. There is also a bin because dog owners are required to pick up after their dogs even though this is a dog toilet.
