Morning Trainers!
I’ve been wondering if you could give me an idea why the submission appeal was not accepted.
As in the appeal notes(pasted below screenshots for easier reading) - in my opinion this structure has both cultural meaning and is quite unique.
It’s a two-story stand made by a local artist that was an outdoor art museum for his sculptures.With the structure resembling to the Roman Aqueducts - at the moment covered in the ivy - symbolizing the time passing by and staying close with the nature
Zbudowany przez lokalnego artystę miał służyć do prezentowania swoich rzeźb. Nigdy niedokończony - dziś obrasta bluszczem symbolizując przemijanie i bliskość z naturą
Appeal notes below: I don’t understand which criteria wasn’t met. It’s a place, in a public walkable space that is unique and easily recognizable. Unfortunately google street view has old photos on which it hasn’t been built yet, but the place is accessible:
In summary - I can see that you could have questions in regards to the picture quality and I’m more than happy to retake them if necessary- but I don’t reallt see which criteria wasnt adheard. In my opinion that place is
A great place for exploration - I walk my dog every day admiring this interesting structure made by local artisian
A permanent physical, tangible, and identifiable place or object, or object that placemarks an area - as stated before, such constructuon is nowhere near to be seen and is non movable object
A safe and publicly accessible by pedestrians (indoor or outdoor) - it’s near public pavewalk(droga wewnętrzna)
Containing accurate information in the title, description, and photo - As before, if it’s necessary I’m happy to provide higher quality pictures it that’s something that made you reject the submission.
Thank you in advance Marcin
If you could share any ideas with me, so I could be more careful with my future submissions - that would be awesome!
Looking at this as a reviewer, it looks like a fence. There’s nothing you have provided that overcomes this problem, so the appeal reviewer will have seen a fence.
You can make claims it is something else, but without evidence of this, those claims hold no value. When something walks like a duck, talks like a duck then it will be treated as a duck unless you can prove otherwise. Just about the only proof you could provide here is links to legitimate websites.
It wasn’t rejected for not being publicly accessible, so mentioning it’s accessibility in the appeal would not help.
Well, You’re right, on the tiny screens this might seem like one, thank you for pointing it out
Added the submission photo as well so it’s easier to see.
This is basically two-story stand made for showing off his sculptures
At the time I sent the appeal there were no information in regards to why the submission was rejected - hence my appeal
Rejection reasons don’t /always/ show up immediately. They appear on the wayspot nominations page, not in the rejection email. If they don’t appear, refresh the page. If they still don’t appear. close the page and open it again.
I’m not sure that a stand for showing sculptures would be accepted, but even with a larger picture, this simply looks like a fence and pergola, which is why the appeal was rejected as being a boundary wall. I’ve seen aqueducts and only can only see the resemblance here if I squint and use my imagination - that simply won’t work for wayspot reviews.
Welcome! I would also suggest clarifying where the aqueduct or the artwork are - right now it does not come across in the nomination, so I could understand how the appeal reviewer didn’t see it either.
Rejection reasons don’t /always/ show up immediately. They appear on the wayspot nominations page, not in the rejection email. If they don’t appear, refresh the page. If they still don’t appear. close the page and open it again.
Even tho it’s my first submission - I’ve read on the forum about that and after it didn’t show up for half a day after I’ve been relogging bunch of times I just appealed pointing out every criteria it could be rejected for. Nonetheless - coming back to the topic
Thank you for a reply, I can understand how for you a 6m high 15m long wooden skeleton structure would look just like a pergola & a fence.
Thought that the picture should be used for identification reason and the description is as important as the picture itself.
Zawadowski Akwedukt - as a title was provided to me by the person who built it. I wouldn’t dare to change this title even if it’s simply just symbolical
Description:Zbudowany przez lokalnego artystę miał służyć do prezentowania swoich rzeźb. Nigdy niedokończony - dziś obrasta bluszczem symbolizując przemijanie i bliskość z naturą Built by a local artist, never finished(yet still the artist is showing off his sculptures on it in the summer) it’s been taken over by the ivy symbolizing the time passing by and being close with nature
Reading your point of view I start to see how reviewers without the backstory I know could think of it as you say you do. Do you think it’s a good idea to remake the submission and explain it better?
I just tried to make the description as tight as possible and interesting, but maybe I should’ve provide more additional informations that could be helpful for others
your biggest problem is that you have no source that this would be an actual art project instead of a fence or noise barrier. A Google Map entry is not a good enough source to prove that.
Without a source added to the supporting information, all your text is hardly believable
Don’t see how it’s a meaningless phrase tbh. That’s part of explaination how the place is indeed unique and is a part of a sentence explaining what the submission is all about.
It’s not a business, it’s an art project made on his private property. I don’t see how it could be a good idea to provide his personal information with basically a pinpoint of his house. I’m pretty sure it would violate GDPR
You have touched on another problem with this submission. SFPRP - single-family private residential property. If you realise it would be a violation of someone’s privacy to put information about them on a wayspot at their house, be aware that it is a violation of their privacy to have a wayspot at their house.
If it is a location where the artist has a studio and invites people to the studio to browse around it, then it wouldn’t be a problem to name the artist and the studio.
This also opens up the possibility to Reject as "Single Family Private Residence Property (SFPRP).
I think you misunderstood what was said. “Made by Brian Niantic” is good, “Made by local artists” doesn’t really give any information, it doesn’t add anything…
