Yes, I’m getting sick of signs being used for Wayspots when the actual Wayspot meets photo guidelines, and it happens alot in the US and Canada. I do in review move lications when the sign is the main photo, but the nomination is for a church, a lical business, etc.
The old sign was replaced with a new sign (see Street View screenshot from my OP), so it still exists, just with an old photo of the previous sign, and out-of-date title and description. The sign was there before the marquee, which was only added within the last few years, so I can see why it was used as the POI for the cinema. This is also quite an old Wayspot, possibly coming from Ingress originally or an import.
I’m going to wait to see what gets decided for the title/description edits. Regardless of how the title/description edits go for the sign, I think I’ll submit a new Wayspot at the building, but I’ll focus on the marquee. It really is quite a lovely marquee, whether it’s day or night, but really nice at night.
I’ll also take an updated photo of the current sign and submit that, since I know it doesn’t meet removal criteria, but it needs an updated photo. And if the outstanding edits get rejected, I can submit them again, maybe a little more accurate to it being the sign.
Yep, just a wait and see with the sign edits right now. I did have dozens resolved yesterday, so hopefully it won’t be too long, especially since both are in voting.
Another option is to edit the name of the sign, to add “Sign” to the end. By turning down your edits, Niantic is signaling that they consider the sign to be the waypoint. So call it what it is.
Then when you nominate the marquee, reviewers won’t mark it as duplicate of the existing wayspot.
The community only rejected the photo so far; there hasn’t been any decision on the title/description edits, which are in community voting as well. Even many of the park signs that are the main Wayspot for the parks I have tried to remove “Sign” from, those title edits get rejected.
Even if the title edit is approved, I’d still use marquee in that nomination, so ML/community knowns the difference.
I don’t think this is what’s happening at all. It’s more likely that they see the sign and the building as one Point of Interest, and as the wayspot is on the sign it’s a valid placement. They’ve said countless times that as long as the Wayspots placement is valid, they won’t move it, and attempts to move it could be considered abuse.
I wouldn’t mark it as a duplicate. It can be viewed as a separate lighting art piece. Marquees also are important to film history, ones that re disappearing as well, as they were the way for cinemas and theaters to advertise what they were currently showing, or the entertainers performing there.
And that’s exactly what I’ll focus on when I nominate: the marquee being lighting art and a part of a disappearing history in film and entertainment.
We also need to get away from signs being the valid POI for Wayspots if the building itself is valid. Naintic needs to change that big time; I’m sick of so many churches having their Wayspots at their signs and not the actual church itself.
I nominated a local restaurant that’s been open since 1961 last month. I used the sign for the main photo, but I put the pin on the restaurant entrance. It was not moved by reviewers from where I placed it, and is at the front entrance.
This truly is a US/Canada issue, especially since many places have signs that aren’t on the buildings, and a good deal of that has to do with our reliance on cars. We really need to move away from this Signfarer attitude and think more like our international counterparts.
I see no reason why you can’t just have both. Signs exist to draw people in to whatever they’re representing, you know, getting people to explore. One of the three main eligibility criteria right there. Then the place that sign represents can stand on it’s own merits.
I find that odd that a photo edit nomination on my contributions screen clearly sets out the existing and proposed photos, but a reviewer’s screen does not label them, so they do not know what the proposed change to the photo is.
I think the reasoning behind not identifying which is the new photo is so that you review impartially. Rejecting the photo that is actually the current does not remove it from the Wayspot.
My other observation on nominated edits is that it would be really helpful to have a text box so the nominator could provide some explanation for the rationale behind the edit. There is so much opportunity to do this for nominating wayspots and it seems strange that there is no such facility for edits.
completely agree! wayfarers have been asking for this for years!
there was a brief time where we could appeal rejected edits to help chat without having to use one of our two appeals. that way we could supply the extra information at least there. it was so nice!
I’m trying hard not to use my appeals on my rejected edits right now. Most can just be resubmitted anyways. I did appeal 1 so far, as it’s current name even shows on Google Maps, and since it’s an arena managed by the city park district, I was able to provide the official link showing the current name. Also, my photo and description edit with the current name were accepted, so how wasn’t the title?
Yes, Niantic is a US company, but their products are offered globally. Some international users get upset when their Wayspot is rejected, thinking it was because the criteria being based on how much of the US is, but we almost always find that even in their country it wouldn’t meet criteria.
Seriously, there are so many things to ask for another AMA…
Actually, I get a lot of title/description/location edits together, not separately, especially if they were submitted around the same time. I’ve also found that if you upgrade just one of these edits, all will be upgraded and resolved around the same time.
Photo submissions are separate from the other edits, but there is a lot of coupling of the others.
Around whenever edits got added to contributions and the upgrade fixes got pushed. No announcement I recall.
I know many (not all) of my edits do not get resolved together and in the same reviewing session I’ll see a description edit and then later a title edit that I know was for the same POI.
