Is a PokéLids not appropriate as a Wayspot? Why is Wayspot being removed?

I read twice in the old forum a topic where a Wayspot on a PokéLids was misinterpreted as a duplicate and required to be removed. I forget where one was, but I remember the other. It is a PokéLids in Vulpix, Eniwa, and Wayspot got both removed as a result. What both have in common is that they were Wayspots that were significantly displaced from the pokerid itself. I questioned the topic, but thought that if it was so misplaced, there was nothing I could do about it, so I did not state anything.
After presenting the official PokéLids Pokéstop, he showed the Wayspot-derived Pokéstop and claimed it was a duplicate. However, the official Pokéstop in Pokélid was generated by the Pokémon GO team and not Wayspot. Therefore, Wayfinder applies as the best place to explore. It may be Wayfinder’s hometown, but it may also be very far away and take the time to visit and apply. I have also applied for Wayspot after spending half a day visiting and enjoying a PokéLids. Of course, it also takes half a day to return. So even though it is someone else’s business, I can’t help but resent the removal of Wayspot in PokéLids, which is not even a duplicate.
Today, however, I heard from a colleague that four Wayspots in Machida, Tokyo’s PokéLids have been removed. These had a maximum error margin of 5 meters. And of course, there are no duplicate Wayspots.Why were these Wayspots removed? I am attaching an image. This is the surrounding Wayspot that appears when submitting a public wayspot from Lightship’s Geospatial Browser. It shows all of them, including the ones that have been deleted. As you can see, there are no duplicates. Why do you delete them? There should be no duplicates in your database. I will not be convinced unless you explain why.


My point is that you should not delete a Wayspot that is actually there, meets the suitability criteria, does not violate the rejection criteria, and is not a duplicate. Please do not delete it as a duplicate, like the Vulpix PokéLids in Eniwa City. If the team receives a request for deletion due to a duplicate, please check the Wayspot database first to see if there is a duplicate.

Attached is the official website where the PokéLids that Wayspot removed is featured. There is a link to Google Maps, from which you can also check the exact location.


I found an account that confessed to reporting it on X. It was an account created for trolling and frequently disappears from X. I saved the screenshots posted by that account. From what I can see, I guess this account contacted the Pokemon Go site (お問い合わせ — Report an Issue with a Pokéstop/Gymヘルプセンター). The ticket number is displayed, so Niantic can investigate.


My first thought is that maybe Niantic’s legal agreement with Pokemon (Nintendo) has something to say about putting their trademarked creatures in Wayspots. Maybe something to do with Wayspots being used across many games - Niantic doesn’t want to pay Nintendo for the right. Or maybe something else.

But maybe it’s a spammer. Glad you have the ticket number. But if Niantic doesn’t reply - maybe it’s a legal thing they’d rather not talk about.

Thank you, I found out that the operation is not on the Wayfarer team but on the Japanese subsidiary side. I may have to contact them there, but I don’t know what to do. Rumors are spreading in part because of the deletion. It is rumored that even if you apply for a poke lid itself, Wayfarer’s progressive disciplinary policy will be applied and you will be penalized. I don’t think that’s true.

I think the wisest course of action would be to change the attribute to a Lightship-only attribute, rather than erasing Wayspot, if we want to avoid using Pokélids in games other than Pokémon GO. Art installed outdoors, including Pokélids, is considered public art. It is not prohibited by Japanese law to photograph these public artworks and use them for social networking or filming movies. If we photograph outdoor statues, buildings, or billboards and put them on Wayspot, Niantic will have to pay a royalty fee from the person who designed them. In fact, if that were to happen, Wayfarer would collapse. Therefore, we cannot claim an interest in photographing a Poke lid, which is essentially an outdoor installation, and using it as a Wayspot. However, it would be possible to put such a restriction in the contract between Niantic and Pokémon Inc. We, Wayfinder, do not know about it.