Don’t make me laugh. Ingress portals are just as unimportant as Pokestops. A portal that’s on the Eiffel Tower functions the exact same as the portal on the kiddie playground down the street. So don’t stand here and pretend that the “quality” of the object in the wayspot photo matters in any way, shape or form. All that matters for the game(s) is that they’re there. Even more so for Ingress than Pokemon Go. In an area without Pokestops, you can still catch Pokemon and hatch eggs. What can you do in Ingress in an area with zero portals? Absolutely nothing!
4 Likes
Hello.
I agree with tp235.
And in my case, I am very strict when reviewing “bridges”.
I always rigorously examine whether the design of the bridge itself, the railings, the plaque with the bridge’s name on it, etc. are unique, what the historical background is, etc.
This is because Niantic has set the eligibility criteria for places (things) suitable for Wayspots as “the best place for adventure”. So I will not lose my position as an “adventurer” in PGO. PGO is not just about catching Pokemon.
https://wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/new/criteria/eligibility
Japan has many bridges that are worthy of visiting as wayspots, with historical structures, railings, and bridge nameplates with unique and beautiful designs.
However, there are also many people who loudly claim that “nondescript concrete bridges built decades ago” and “worn-out, corroded nameplates” have historical value to the local area, are a place for interaction, and are recognized by Niantic.
And some people have even gone so far as to call “explorers” like me a “strange player.”
For reference, I’ve attached here the previous removal request and photo.
What do you think?
I don’t see how any of these pedestrian bridges meet removal criteria!
People need to remember that removal criteria are not the same as acceptance criteria for a new waypoint. Existing waypoints don’t have to meet the current acceptance criteria.
So regardless of anyone’s personal views on these bridges, if they’re not on school grounds or permanently removed, and were at the accurate locations, I can’t see why they’d be removed from the games?
My personal view of pedestrian and biking bridges is that they encourage exercise and exploring and make good waypoints.
6 Likes
You bring a very interesting point.
Is there a difference between accepting waypoint/portals criteria and removing criteria.
Because over the past year(s) there has been a lot of removed waypoints/portals for reasons I don’t know. Waypoints that fit the criteria if you ask me.
Usually removals should be for a very few quite clear cut reasons
- Its on school property or something similar
- It blocks emergency services ie its the Emergency dept of a hospital or outside the doors of a fire station
- The object isn’t there anymore ie building demolished or statue removed
- The object was never there ie fake waypoint
There are others but those are some main ones. If the thing is safe, real, doesn’t get in the way of important stuff, and remains at the location then it usually shouldn’t be removed
1 Like
I must have played Ingress wrong because I enjoy competition and increased Portals simply changes my playstyle.
5 Likes
Niantic has been removing a few things recently that are exceptions to the list @frealafgb gave. This seems to be an effort to clean up some areas. They are actively removing graffiti and individual disc golf holes. And in some places, they seem to be removing everything and restoring ones they deem appropriate.
Yes, i think there may be a language issue here. I look very closely at “foot bridges.” I try to determine if they are out in an area that is designed for exploration. We have a lot of natural wooded areas around me. A good foot bridge can be what helps a person with poor mobility get out to do exactly the kind of exploring you’re talking about.
I’m not talking about random bridges that help cars get over creeks and ditches.
I also need to emphasize that im speaking in general terms. I’m not talking about these specific bridges.
2 Likes
Same here. Having more Portals = more chance to get AP & contribute to my badges on the game so I’m always glad to get new ones.
4 Likes
Hello seaprincesshnb
My remarks may have lacked consideration. In Japanese, they were not expressive enough.
And I understand and agree with what you’re claiming.
A bridge over a stream in a natural woodland area. That’s nice.
I’d like to see a picture.
Also, the reason I’ve included photos of examples of Wayspots on “specific bridges” here is because I think that people won’t understand unless they see the Wayspots in real life.
There’s a Japanese proverb that says “seeing is believing.”
This means that no matter how much you listen to people and exchange opinions, the act of seeing the real thing just once is better.
Good day!
Sharing pictures definitely can help, especially when talking across languages and culture. But it is difficult to convey subtle context that may be missing from photos. For example, with these bridges, we might be focusing on bridges in the woods or along a trail, and that’s great to think of how these facilitate exercise & exploration. But simply sharing photos of a few inside the city or urban settings and saying they are ineligible leaves out situations where they can be accepted.
Here’s the kinds of bridges I like to approve. This is technically in a neighborhood. It facilitates going from the amenities area (tennis, pool, basketball, playground) to the natural wetlands. These wetlands are protected so that no houses can be built on them. They provide a really lovely place for the neighbors to walk, even though there’s no “named trail” back there. By building this (and one other) footbridge to access this area, I believe the neighborhood has clearly indicated that they want that wetlands area to be a place people go to explore nature. This is my supplemental photo so that you can see more of the surrounding area - how boggy it is and why the bridge is necessary.
2 Likes
Hello seaprincesshnb
Thank you for the wonderful photos!!
I want to actually go there, stand on the bridge, and take a deep breath!
This is exactly the type of “bridge wayspot” I have been longing for.
This is truly a case of “seeing is believing.”
Don’t breathe too deeply, mosquitos might fly up your nose! hahahahahahaha
2 Likes
That’s a problem! Because I “know” that mosquitoes are not tasty to eat!!! 
In the netherlands whitout footbridges, you stuck on your island, you cant go to next district, or to a park or whatever there is. Because the are everywhere canals and water.
So all the footbridges are build to explore the other side of the waterbody
I heard if you fry them in honey batter, it would taste sweet… allegedly.
They provide a really lovely place for the neighbors to walk, even though there’s no “named trail”. By building this (and few other) footbridge to access this area, I believe the neighborhood has clearly indicated that they want that park/forest/beach area to be a place people go to explore nature. As you can see here on the map picture its clearly the only access to go to the lake beach or explore the park is the footbridge or to flowercentrum whit café
Here a walking route crossing footbridges.
A few more of rejected footbridges
Location that have offical route whit bridges for pedestrian,
And are very nice location to walk whit a lot of nature and big 
flowers and those areas most time its the only thing you can try nominate.
It will ad so much more explore to a lot people around the world if footbridges only accessible for pedestrian 
where accepted.
If its bridge accessible by car then rejected.
Personally i like to stand on a footbridge, its always a nice safe location to stand still a moment and play on your mobile phone.
And it connects parts where you cant go whit out the footbridges
1 Like
Can you provide some clarity on your comments re footbridges?
We have a lot of Appalachian Trail-style plank footbridges in my area–essentially just two planks nailed to a footing. Easy for trail volunteers (such as myself) to install and maintain, and cheap, which is good, because we don’t get a lot of funding. These are bridges that make walking on designated trails easier.
Everyone over on reddit is telling me that they aren’t bridges (they are), that they’re not safe (definitely safer than the rocky, uneven trails they connect), and that they don’t have architectural relevance (true).
I believe they are eligible as great places to explore and exercise. They’re not overengineered fancy footbridges installed by contractors, they are functional footbridges installed and maintained by volunteers, and perfectly fill their use case requirements. In this case the intended use is pedestrian only, and they’re not on ADA-accessible trails.
Not sure if I should appeal current rejections or stop submitting these style bridges altogether.
But unfortunately, wayfinders have arbitrarily and expansively approved bridges that are “made of mere concrete” and have “only a roadway, a sidewalk, and in some cases, a roadway” as acceptable.
There are no wayfinders out there who think “good quality”.
Most of the wayfinders who consider “good quality” as you say here have already given up on the current state of Wayfarer and left.
And Emily, who learned of that erroneous review, cannot distinguish between bridges that are only such constructs and bridges over boardwalks as you say, and approves all of them.
If you don’t trust what I say, log in to the Ingress Mission Authoring Tool with your Ingress account, type in “橋” in Japanese, look at the portal that appears, and then view the location in Google Street View and you will understand what I mean.