Just venting slightly. Been getting a lot of rejection just saying this. Doesn’t matter if its a trail marker, a bowling, a cinema, a cafe or a gym (cause thats mostly what I’ve been submitting recently, admittedly cafes and cinemas are pushing my luck ones), seems to just be this rejection reason. It seems people are being lazy in their reviewing and just selecting that. I’m not asking for advice cause so far every one thats been rejected for this reason has been accepted on appeal after, as i say im just venting cause it means I need to wait another 20 something days (or whatever it is now) to appeal my rejection and get it accepted, all for a crap rejection reason
10 Likes
I feel you.
Also I got some rejected “Private property” because people don’t understand business is allowed, so they think if it is indoor = it is private property, which is really sad.
5 Likes
Might as well resubmit, some of them may even get accepted while you wait for your appeals to refresh.
2 Likes
I’m not sure which rejection reasons turns into “Lacking historical or cultural importance”, but a lot of reviewers know that in order to reject a submission, you have to explicitly reject it. Thumbs down for Social, Exercise and Exploration is not a rejection.
If Appropriate, Safe and Accuracy are all OK, then you have to reject as not Permanent and Distinct. It’s possible that these rejections get combined with other rejections to make that narrative.
If you are getting lots of rejections for things that appear legitimate (which these appear to be), then it’s worth stepping back and looking at your submissions to see why they are disliked.
Even though you don’t want advice because you can appeal, it might still help you if you could make a change which gets the submissions accepted without appealing, so asking for advice would help with that.
1 Like
Unfortunately, a lot of Wayfarer reviewers think they’re working at Fodors Travel Guides. They’ll reject anything unless you can prove George Washington slept there.
6 Likes
Dunno about your local area, but i know ow in uk, cafes and cinemas (should mention, they are chain cinemas, i think they’re acceptable as they meet the socialising criteria, but lots dont like them) are really really hard to get through, while gyms tend to be 50/50 at best. The trail marker one was weird as I had a good picture, linked the map, was seen on google etc etc, thst one of didnt bother appealing g and just resubmitted and it passed, but the rejection reason was annoying
2 Likes
Also UK based. I didn’t know until recently that cafes were suitable POI, but it certainly makes sense as they meet social criteria; I expect a lot of other reviewers also didn’t and don’t know. Unfortunately, that’s what we have to work with. Anything which isn’t an almost-certain (cafe, cinema, gyms, trail markers), is helped by having a submission with no negatives and a eye-catching photo.
I’m not sure if your trail marker was a named trail or a straightforward PROW marker. I find the former almost always accepted while the latter are often not accepted when leaving from roads (even if pointing into the countryside).
1 Like
In regards to Cafes I work on that the criteria is “A Great Place To Socialise” so it is not a case to Accept them all. The submitter should show evidence of excellent review scores, awards etc.
I have often paraphrased / repeated a comment that I saw on here “would you pass a couple of similar locations to get to this one” then you should explain why.
1 Like
I think that cafes suffer a lot.
A cafe should inherently tick the place to be social category.
For a pub we don’t demand much from a pub description or rating etc, so it baffles me that sometimes the standard applied seems to be so high.
I have a local cafe that I must try once again. It’s been there since 1979 and until covid I don’t think it had been redecorated - it has been now but nothing that is fancy. The outside hasn’t been redecorated.
It is cheap, basic menu. It’s a warm, dry place to sit and chat with a mug of tea and beans on toast.
It will never score highly in any ratings I doubt if anyone that uses it would ever consider doing so. Actually just looked in total on trip advisor 18 reviews 
the last one was Dec 2024 and the one before that Oct 2023, then 1 in 2022. 
But it is busy, locals like it, its noisy as people talk - you will overhear more local gossip than on any website. In my book that makes it a great place to be social.
I will face an uphill battle ( yes it will feel like a battle) to get it accepted because evidence is not something I can make magically appear.
I guess this is a long way to say …..I’m questioning if we are setting standards too high?
4 Likes
I understand what you are stating but there has to be something. If we didn’t use the review score / awards protocol then where do you set the limit. Would we start to get nominations for the cafe that put a dozen people in hospital due to food poisoning? The 1 that has been closed down several times due to rat infestation?
There will always be cases that slip under or over the current system but I don’t see asking for review scores “setting standards too high”.
2 Likes
I understand what @elijustrying is saying. Lots of popular cafes don’t have enough ratings to hit a high review standard, but are still heavily used and definitely meet social criteria.
1 Like
I do find it interesting and somewhat of a double standard that cafes and restaurants are held to such a high standard; yet, people readily accept a single wooden picnic table off in some corner of a park, or a simple framed painting hung in an office, or a small fenced area in an apartment complex called a “dog park” even though it’s tiny without any thing for the pups to do but their “business,” etc. Does anyone know why they (cafes and restaurants) are so much more difficult (and I don’t mean the ubiquitous chain stores in the US, the actual local places)?
1 Like
As I stated, I know the “Review Score” system is going to exclude some places that probably should be acceptable, the problem is how are you going to show evidence otherwise.
I also expect the same with Restaurants, I do not accept “any” Restaurant. The submitter needs to show that it is a “great” place to socialise and Review Scores / Awards are the only way I can see to prove this is the case for people who are likely to have never visited the place.
We can’t just accept the “Loved by the locals” notes we often get.
You missed a word. It should be “yet, some people…”
Single Picnic Table: I would want to see that it is permanent, at a scenic view before accepting. A single picnic bench I am more likely to Reject or Skip depending on the other factors.
Office Painting: I am likely to skip, there is unlikely to be any evidence that it is where the submitter states it is and that it meets the main criteria. No proof then I am happy to Skip.
Dog Park: I want to see other factors, is it signed, is it fenced, does it have other facilities such poo bag station, bin etc” otherwise it is a grassed area that dog owners might use for that purpose but it isn’t a “Dog Park” and therefore I would Reject.
Yes, some people, but unfortunately, I think you missed the point of my post. It was to ask if anyone is aware of any history. behind holding cafés and restaurants to such high standards compared to other points of interest?
1 Like
I don’t see that they are being hold to such high standards.
A cafe that is a “great” place to socialise will have reviews what with Google Maps, Trip Adviser and many more. A new place that does not have reviews as not shown that it is a great place yet.
A Dog Park that has the facilities I stated above is a great place to exercise with your dog.
The question I am trying to get across is how does a Reviewer accept that a cafe is a “great” place without using reviews.
Ive used a line wrapping around the building as my supporting photo a couple of times
Sorry, I don’t understand the meaning of this.
a long line of customers wating to enter/order
1 Like
Translating -
line = queue
4 Likes
I definitely didn’t get that either. I was imagining a huge ribbon.
1 Like