Looking for Feedback: Making Long Supporting Info More Reader-Friendly

[HikeLadyLDK]

I have just uploaded some Wayspots along a stretch of a local Hiketrail where theres only markings with water resistant paints (As previously discussed here: I don't agree with this Appeal decision, please have a second look. (Hike trail) - #20 ), and I tried to give compact information about everything I thought most important. Sadly, I fear with a supporting Info like this, TLDR-Syndrome will kick in and most reviewers won’t read through it So I wanted to share and see if people have opinions on it and can help.

As a sidenote: I really think Texts in the Supporting info should be formatable, so you can present them more visually appealing than in a clump of text that’s hard to read and needs a click to be expanded. It would really help a lot for everyone putting effort into their supporting Info.

Heres one of the nominations in Question:

Translation:

The Northern City Forest Circular Trail leads hikers through Herborn’s beautiful northern city forest, past beautiful views and interesting spots such as the Herborn game reserve and the Uckersorfer Grillhütte, which invites you to take a break and enjoy the beautiful view. At this point, it leads up to the Steinseite ridge, where you can hike and enjoy the view.

Translation:

Hiking trails are excellent POIs because they encourage people to hike and explore together. The route of the hiking trail at this point can be verified here: Waymarked Trails - Hiking This sign is a so-called insurance sign, which reassures hikers that they are still on the right path and have not missed a turn. It is therefore important for orientation along the trail. I would like to point out that the hiking trail itself is the POI here, and the nature of the marking should have little or no influence on the rating. However, I would like to clarify that these color markings are not less permanent, but rather more permanent, than plastic plaques or vinyl stickers. The paint is weatherproof and grows with the tree, so it lasts for many years. You can see what it looks like when a marking has been applied for a very long time, and how it is replaced when it fades, here: https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/wayfarer/original/3X/f/1/f13705f1623771991d452c3f8cab538bb9ab7c48.jpeg In addition, plaques attached with nails damage the trees and are entry points for diseases and fungi. Plastic plaques are also often taken as souvenirs by careless hikers, which makes it difficult to find your way along the trail. Germany is a hiking country, and our hiking tradition goes back a long way. Markers like these have been around for centuries, and they have proven their worth in Germany. How hiking trails are marked in Germany can be seen in this video (especially about color markings from minute 1:00): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84EryF7hwo4 I would like to emphasize that the Wayfarer criteria must always be interpreted according to local perspectives and circumstances, which is why the rich German hiking tradition is a good reason to consider hiking trails in Germany as particularly valuable.

My problem is, as said above, that I fear few will read this long text, but I also think all the Info is neccessary. Maybe the community has Ideas how to shorten this while still having the Info? And hwo to make a detailled supporting info as appealing to read as possible?

[NianticAtlas]

Hey @HikeLadyLDK! I’ve moved your post into its own thread so the discussion doesn’t get lost in the original one. This should help the community focus more directly on your questions and provide better feedback. Feel free to tweak the thread title if it doesn’t quite match what you had in mind. Cheers!

[shritwod]

I’m inclined to vote for trail markers, but what I’d want to see is some information about the trail and its significance (e.g. website of park/government/whatever) and something to help confirm the route of the trail (map of trail, link to OpenStreetMap, photosphere). I’d suggest putting that information at the top to help reviewers who would want to vote for it.

[HikeLadyLDK]

But… didn’t I do just that? The Link to the Trail map is just at the top of the supporting Info, and I tried to decribe why the Trail is significant in the description, didn’t I?

[shritwod]

You know, you’re right. I think my eyes glazed over at the wall of text, which could be part of the problem.

[cyndiepooh]

I believe your issue with getting these accepted has been that they are painted on the trees. I think most explorers who would even get to your supporting statement without having already rejected based on the photo will not need to be convinced that markers meet criteria. I would lead with the statement about the paint: Something like:

Marker is in specialized weatherproof paint that expands with tree growth to permanently denote the trail without damaging the tree: link to verification about the paint. See route of trail here: link to trail map

You can save your longer argument that these trail markers should be considered permanent and why they are better than other options for any appeals you make. Good luck with this!

[HikeLadyLDK]

I understand, but the problem is, appeals are quite rare to get, and I’d need a lot to get this trail through… But yes, I fear, this is the way.

I still think a better formatting options (Like Hyperlinks, pragraphs…) in Supporting Informations would be really helpful to make more detailled descriptions more viable.

Edit: I changed my Supporting info to:

Wanderwege sind sehr gute POI, da sie zum gemeinsamen wandern und erkunden einladen. Karte de Wegs: → Waymarked Trails - Hiking ← Diese Art von Markierungen ist Permanent. Hier ein Video wo gezeigt wird, wie Wanderwege in Deutschland markiert sind: → https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84EryF7hwo4 ← ab Minute 1:00. Diskussion dazu im Wayfarer Forum: → I don't agree with this Appeal decision, please have a second look. (Hike trail) ← Deutschlands besondere Wanderkultur ist ein besonderes kulturelles Merkmal unseres Landes und verdient daher besondere beachtung.

Translation:

Hike Trails are excellent POI, as they encourage hiking in groups and exploration. Map of the Trail: → Waymarked Trails - Hiking ← This kind of marker is permanent. Here is a video, wich shows how trails in germany are marked: → https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84EryF7hwo4 ← from minute 1:00. Linked discussion in the wayfarer Forums: → I don't agree with this Appeal decision, please have a second look. (Hike trail) ← germanys special hiking culture is an exceptionally valuable cultural feature of our country and therefore deserves special recognition.

Its way shorter, but not as short @cyndiepooh suggested. What do you guys think?

Also what do you think about seperating Links in supporting info with arrows? I think it makes it easier to spot them in the Textwalls that supporting info texts are…

[DTrain2002]

You don’t need to explain to reviewers that trails are excellent POIs, encourage hiking (exercise) and exploration. The link to the Wayfarer forums may also be an issue, especially if those of us that have been discussing this use the same username with Wayfarer, which I do, and this could be revealing personal info. I also don’t think you need to note the importance of hiking in a certain country/culture, as many people all over the world hike.

Providing a link to the map is great. Explaining how this marker is permanent with a video link is great. Supporting info is to prove that a nomination meets criteria, not explain the criteria to reviewers or link to anything like the forums that could give personal info/usernames to reviewers.

And yes, separating links does help, but maybe just use a hyphen with spaces, like this - instead.

[HikeLadyLDK]

Since I think only a minority of people read the Forums or even criteria clarification, I think its OK to Highlight that this is an object that encourages exploration and excercise. This poarticular sentence is used by most in our community, and we really feel here, that it improves the chances of nomination, so I thiunk it can stay, but I moved it to the end.

You are right that Links to the Forum, especially to post I wrote myself (no matter the discussion) might be seen as influencing or giving away my (niantic) identity, wich could be problematic. I removed it and replaced it with a Link to a picture that highlights how durable those trail merkers are.

Also the sentence about hiking culture is gone. I think its valid to have it, but for the sake of shortening, i think its not needed too much.

[DTrain2002]

Here’s the thing though: people tend to have short attention spans, so the longer the supporting info with unneeded info in it, the less likely reviewers will actually read it fully.

You don’t need to highlight what criteria it meets, as reviewers do have access to the criteria on the Wayfarer website while reviewing. You don’t need to note how hiking is important to a certain culture, as, like I said earlier, hiking is done all over the world.

There’s a park with a hiking trail not far from where I live here in the US; many people enjoy it as it’s next to the river, so they can see many waterfowl and other animals dependent on water while hiking. So, is hiking not something that some Americans like to do as well? Don’t they see it as a good way to get in some exercise and explore their area?

Supporting info has to prove that your nomination meets criteria, not explain criteria. For POIs not on satellite/Street View, providing more info to where it’s located is helpful, such as the link to the map you’ve provided. Being to the point with supporting info and not adding anything unneeded is best. I try to keep mine as short as possible, with only the needed info to prove my nominations meet criteria and, if needed, are where I say they are.

[AgentX1976]

I find for the most part supporting information should be used for the issues that the reviewer ‘can’t see’. Most reviewers probably have made the decision already to accept or reject based on the main photo, title and description. In those pieces of information the reviewer already knows what they need to know to accept or reject. I typically use my supporting info to explain to the reviewer what they probably can’t see. I am assuming that this trail is in a heavily wooded area. So probably it won’t have street view and there will be no way to see this from satellite. This is where I use my knowledge of that area to show the reviewer what I am seeing and to put them in my shoes so they can feel confident about the location I have placed the pin.

Reiterating the Wayfarer criteria is probably not necessary as reviewers will know that the trail marker is a valid PoI. I think as others have stated the problem for this type of submission is that it is paint on a tree and if you are not familiar with that particular trail people probably think it’s temporary, and to be honest they probably saw the long Supporting info and saw it as a red flag that something fishy is going on.

My suggestion would to download a GPS camera that overlays the coordinates onto your supporting photo.

I used this one to prove the location of an area that is brand new construction and the satellite view still shows it as a farm field.

The only other thing in the supporting info that you might look for is some sort of proof that that trail exists at that location and that they use painted markers. Use @cyndiepooh 's suggestions on that. The more you show the reviewer, the more likely they will believe you are telling the truth about what you are writing.

I think you are on the right track, just keep it simple.

[frealafgb]

I seem to be the laziest of the forum people, I was just looking at my trail marker submissions and it seems I don’t write much

I think I had stuff like this rejected so many times that I stopped trying so hard because it was too frustrating and the quality of my submission seemed to be irrelevant to whether it was accepted or not, so I went with minimal effort to make myself less invested and less angry

I do agree addressing issues/things the person can’t see from the nomination is important which I do in a couple of these but yeah… I didnt write much

These were all accepted

[HikeLadyLDK]

I think you’re probably right. While I really like describing in Detail whats going on with my submission, I surely noticed that longer supporting Info is often seen as something people dont like, either because they dont want to read/reasearch that much or because they supspect the submitter tries to sweet talk something.

In my community, people already tried GPS Camera photos, to really little effect, if not they got more rejects because of it. So I think i’ll abstain, as those can be manipulated and, as a too long text, can be unjustly seen as a sign of persuasion/coverup going on. Also people already check Maps and other Links, i think they don’t want to manually check coordinates from a photo, and the reviewers map doesn’t show coordinates. Also submission with GPS Photos often had the rejection reason “bad photo”. And as i have seen wilder things, like something getting rejected for “license plate” when its only on the supporting photo. I don’t think its worth the risk, but i think its a useful tool if your regional community supports it.

Whenever possible, i try to get something into the supporting Picture thats visible on the Map, but on Hike trails, that’s not always possible.
In my opinion, a trail Map should always suffice the need to verify the location of a trail.

Also, and that’s what is a big part mof what I try to achieve here, i really want reviewers to know that the trail marker itself has little to no no impact on the validity of the trail. This is an example of a trailmarker that got through via appeal:

As you see, its pretty damaged and not really appealing. Still it did not affect the Teams judgement on this beeing a permanent trail (while color markings regularly do)

Anyways, I’ve been to the Drawingboard and reshaped my supporting Info a lot. It now looks like this (translated)

Trail map: - Waymarked Trails - Hiking - This type of marking is permanent. Here’s a video showing how hike trails are marked in Germany: - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=84EryF7hwo4 - A photo of a marking that faded after many years (as evidenced by tree growth) and was replaced: - https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/wayfarer/original/3X/f/1/f13705f1623771991d452c3f8cab538bb9ab7c48.jpeg -

[cyndiepooh]

fwiw, i would read this supporting section now.

[HikeLadyLDK]

Thanks

I still think we should be able to add better supporting Info, with hyperlinks, paragraphs and so on, as I still think people shy from reading longer supporting info more because oft it beeing close to unreadable as it gets longer. It would help to be able to describe submissions in a more structured way.

[shritwod]

Yes, it can really help to have an explanation to go with the supporting photo - e.g. what direction you are looking, what landmarks can be used to verify the location etc. Alas quite a lot of submissions are in woods which always makes my heart sink.

[HikeLadyLDK]

As said, that’s not always possible.

BUT you can (actually should) verifiy the location of the trail an the submitted spot by adding a Map to verify the location of a trail. That should be enough to verify a trail in the forest. If not, its enough reason to say “i don’t know” instead of rejecting.

We are told that we should always work with the infos we get, and as long as enough evidence is provided, we should decide accordingly. Of course, having street view or cool Landmarks around helps a great deal, but its not always possible.

[shritwod]

I do like to make photospheres, but that’s quite difficult these days. Here’s an example of a the supporting information for submission that worked without one.