Is this worth a retry?

I foind this bench in a windfarm with a phenomenal view

Just called it whitlee windfarm lochview bench

1 Like

I like it. Looks tranquil AF. A great place to explore and get some fresh air and all those other things mentioned under the exercise criteria that don’t necessarily equate to exercise (although getting there quite likely involves exercise as well anyway?)

However, I think many people are still very wrapped up in certain interpretations of criteria that weren’t necessarily communicated well, especially when you consider additional context and clarifications that suggest some were intended differently.
In this case you’re likely up against the regular contextomy of the word “generic” from the rejection criteria (where the criteria the word is used under is, in fact, relating to things that don’t meet criteria to begin with, rather than because of) :woman_shrugging:t2:

I think you’ll probably need to do a hard sell on it as a lookout point and state in supporting that the bench is just a placemarker. It should be common sense IMO, but people do like to cram everything into their preconceived rigid little boxes, even if it doesn’t really fit at all :woman_shrugging:t2:


I could absolutely be persuaded by a scenic viewpoint such as this one, although of course you might get reviewers who are going to go “bench”, but that doesn’t make it any less eligible imo.

However I’m not quite sure what is going on in your supporting info, looks like it was unfinished. Might be worth considering reworking it and make the most convincing use of this space possible? :slight_smile:


They definitely can be accepted but there hard to get accepted

The first one is a very good one that someone else nominated near where i live and the second is one i got accepted and its definitely a worse photo.

1 Like

I agree with it being a great scenic lookout, a nice view and a peaceful place to view nature. I’m thinking someone rejected it for not being permanent and distinct, meaning they didn’t see it as something unique, hence the Temp/Seasonal or Not Distinct rejection reason. Other could be almost anything, so hard to say exactly how it was rejected; maybe thumbs down on socialize/exercie/explore, maybe some IDKs.

Selling it as a bench isn’t the way to go, so if you do resubmit, I’d highlight it as a scenic lookout, maybe with the title including the farm’s name and that it’s a scenic lookout or view of the loch, as well as removing any mention in the title of the bench. Also, I might not combine loch and view as one word; loch scenic lookout or loch scenic view would be more acceptable to me (sorry, I can get a little picky with how titles are worded, or if proper grammar is used).

You could mention the bench in the description, but you’ll still want it to highlight the view of the loch, which is the main focal point; wind turbines aren’t all that exciting to look at to most. Maybe mention some of what can be viewed in general, such as it being a great place to view the animals that call the loch home, for example.

It for sure is a harder sell with the community, but making some changes to the title and description may help, as well as the supporting info. Pointing it out more as a scenic lookout looks a lot better to the community than calling it a bench.


I’ve been there :sunglasses:
It’s not often you get such a clear day.
I would avoid the word bench maybe say more about what you can see.


Gazza, that’s a brilliant poi! Nothing generic about that view!

The problem is that the view is a natural feature, so not eligible and the bench is really not distinct in itself. It might be possible to get it accepted as a viewpoint, but tricky.

Natural features can be wayspots, but you need a way to mark a specific location for them. That’s why we look for physical objects like signs or even benches.

1 Like

I used to be of the opinion that these sorts of things weren’t eligible but I think things have changed in recent times, criteria is still super unclear but there are increasing numbers of people advocating for lookouts and viewpoints like this.

You have a good anchor point here and a lovely view, it really looks like somewhere I’d love to explore and visit. I fear it may be an uphill battle and you’ll have to do a good job convincing certain people but I think it’s certainly worth retrying.

Make sure you are submitting the viewpoint rather than the bench and explain the the bench is just the anchor point for the submission. Give it a distinctive, unique name, referencing location in case there are other similar points.

1 Like

I note in this case that there actually is a Blackwood Hill Viewpoint wayspot to the northeast, so it might be a hard sell as a viewpoint.

It looks like there might be a named trail around the loch, the Lochgoing Circuit according to this: - that might be good for some wayspots.

No reason different lookouts around a large area can’t be nominated successfully, but they would need to be given distinct titles (e.g: directional).

Also, natural features have been clarified as eligible since 3.1 (don’t get bogged down in specific examples, as others often have, there’s been other mentions, I just don’t have them to hand ATM) :wink:


Hmmm, it would be good to find a link to that to support the nomination as that might swing it.

that is from the November 2020 AMA which they had not brought to this forum the last time i checked but News & Announcements is such a jumble i may have missed it. you can currently see this through this link, but idk how long the old stuff will be available: November AMA - Your questions, answered! — Wayfarer