These days, I am happy that most Wayspot candidates come out within a week. And when I go in every day and check, more than 90% of them are in the shape of a hot air balloon and are being reviewed, so I think this is Emily.
But… is there an error in Emily?
Or did I write the title and description differently, resulting in the same result as in the photo?
If you look closely, the Wayspot candidates in the photo look similar, but they are different Wayspot candidates and are in completely different locations.
Emily (hot air balloon) is the same, but why was one similar one approved and the other rejected?
I can’t figure out why there is an error.
The left photo in Photo 1 is a signpost for using the separately installed yellow clay balls on the Geumho River Cherry Blossom Road Barefoot Walking Trail.
The right photo is a signpost for using the footwashing area, which was created so that anyone who used the yellow clay balls or walked the Geumho River Cherry Blossom Road Barefoot Walking Trail can use it. It is uniquely visible only here.
The left photo in Photo 2 is a starting point signpost located in the Dongchon Dunji along the Geumho River, where many people use the trekking and bicycle riding courses. These are unique things that show you your current location and distance.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong, as I have seen others have issues like this before, namely with trail markers that look similar.
ML may see them as too similar to the other accepted Wayspots, hence why they are being rejected. Staff reviews may also see these as the same, too. Both may be seeing them as duplicates, as they are in the same area but different locations. If these can’t be seen from satellite/Street View, that could be another issue.
So it’s possible that the rejected ones either have to be resubmitted differently, possibly using a geotagged photo for the supporting photo, or they have to be appealed. Even on appeal, you may have to provide a geotagged photo or Scaniverse splat to prove they are in different locations and separate POIs.
1 Like
Hi @Royalgeu
The hot air ballon isn’t Emily that’s inhouse review. The ML is working invisible (no own status) as an entrance gate (up to 24/48 h after submitting).
1 Like
Thank you for your reply.
I’ve often seen hot air balloons appear and disappear..
But the hot air balloon sign wasn’t Emily!?
[quote=“AliceWonder1511, post:3, topic:95619”]
The hot air ballon isn’t Emily that’s inhouse review. The ML is working invisible (no own status) as an entrance gate (up to 24/48 h after submitting).
[/quote] I’m not sure what you mean, but thank you for your answer.
Correct. That means “under Niantic/Scopely review” - real humans.
1 Like
Thank you for your reply!
The first photo was rejected even though it was a completely different sign.. I reapplied and it was rejected.. I was frustrated because I couldn’t figure out why, but now I understand. (It’s a completely different information sign..)
I resubmitted and it was rejected again.. hehe…;;;
Even though it’s different…
In the case of the signpost in the second photo, I applied because it was unusual in that it was only installed here and there in the walking and biking section.
Other signposts along this park’s walking trail were approved and appear as Wayspots.
Perhaps, as you said, they looked similar but were in different locations, so they were judged to be the same or they were not unique. (We are unique, hehe;
Thank you!
