I guess you didn’t catch my sarcasm either. Those aren’t CA counties, those are LA mountain ranges. Incorrect title and description, so should have been rejected, even though the POI is pretty good.
I think it’s kinda petty to reject a good POI over a single wrong word. Accept it and then put in an edit to correct the title. I just don’t see the point in being so rigid.
7 Likes
It’s not my job as a reviewer to edit wayspots after they get approved. My job as a reviewer is to properly answer questions designed by Niantic to evaluate nominations that the system gives me to review, and those nominations can be a thousand miles away. One of those questions asks about accuracy. Wayspots with inaccurate titles or description get rejected. And in this particular case it’s not just one word. It’s “California Counties” vs “Los Angeles Mountains”. But even one word could make a lot of difference. Again, in such example the POI is about Los Angeles mountains. Those are also California mountains, because LA is in CA. California Mountains could have been appropriate and fairly accurate title. California Counties is not accurate at all. One word can make a big difference.
I would also like to bring Niantic’s attention to your suggestion. I don’t think it’s appropriate for players to encourage ignoring Niantic rules, let alone for ambassadors.
2 Likes
Hi @Itsutsume
Do you reject nominations for supporting infos where people mentioned gamespecific terms?
And supporting photos with f.e. licence plates, people inside …?
1 Like
Thank you for expanding
Please do not use this topic to “share laughs with others” when the object of that amusement is a nomination/wayspot.
This is a type of approach that ignores the person that made that nomination and seeks to poke fun at them which is a negative behaviour. It is very hurtful and inconsiderate of that person, who could well read the post.
I am aware that other forums and places do allow this to take place, but it is not something that is being encouraged here.
This forum tries to encourage positive behaviours in order to keep it a welcoming space for all.
5 Likes
According to section 8 of Rejection Criteria — Wayfarer Help Center, I view any mentioning of any game anywhere in nominations as request and thus as subject for rejection.
License plates and people on supporting photos are irrelevant, as far as I know.
1 Like
Now that I know that this forum is anti-fun, I promise to be serious and not mock wayspots and nominations to the best of my abilities.
2 Likes
btw, @NianticLC @NianticAaron @NianticAtlas : I don’t think it’s a good idea when ambassadors’ posts that get flagged are reviewed by other ambassadors or same ambassadors. I flagged a post of one ambassador, and it got reviewed by another ambassador. When I flagged a post of this other ambassador, it got reviewed by this same ambassador that I flagged. And this other ambassador seemed to be laughing at me, which apparently is a no-no for this forum. Please take appropriate measures.
1 Like
This can be forgiven because the ingame texts asks the submitter to explain why they think it would make a good pokestop. It isn’t made clear they aren’t submitting a pokestop request, they are submitting a POI for Lightship that may go into PoGo if accepted and if it meets inclusion criteria. Hence all the “where’s my pokestop” questions!
It’s not trying to influence reviewers by mentioning the game. It is perhaps a clumsy way of wording it when mentioning that there are few stops in that area - but I wouldn’t hold that against them.
5 Likes
Who is laughing at you? I can’t see any post that looks like they are laughing at you…
It was a post in private message.
Oh ok. I’m sorry to hear that you had that experience. I’ve always found this forum to be really supportive.
2 Likes
When someone puts “It’s gonna be the first Pokestop here” in supporting info, where they are supposed to explain why this POI would make a good Pokestop, I see it as “Please approve, we need more Pokestops” request. And when someone puts this in supporting info…:
…I also see as at “We need more Pokestops” request.
1 Like
I see it as a lack of education around what a nomination needs. They feel they need to put something in that box - and the game specifically mentions Pokestops. So they just put something! They don’t understand or know about the criteria, especially now they don’t do the quiz, so they don’t realise that’s the box to use to explain how it fits that criteria.
9 Likes
No need to be sorry - I have thick skin 
1 Like
No one laughed at them.
This is how I view it too
I reject nominations that mention the game in the description or title, but I ignore mentions in the supporting text
8 Likes
That would not be a correct view.
From the perspective of the Pokémon Go player the impression you are given throughout is that you are submitting Pokestops. /gyms not wayspots. The wording of the supporting information can easily be taken to mean that you should say why this place would be important for game play. This is a long established issue that has been raised many times. As it is a known issue you should factor that in.
If the information in the supporting section isn’t used to its fullest then you simply have to assess on what is there. You should not view it as counting against the nomination and use as a reason to reject.
The same applies to the supplementary photo. It’s a missed chance, but if there is enough other evidence to see that it is where it is claimed to be then it’s not a reason in itself to reject.
It’s not helpful to take what might be a totally factual statement “there are no pokestops here” at face value, and reinterpret into something that is an instruction to approve and therefore classed as wayfarer abuse and rejected for that reason.
Does that clarify things for you?
6 Likes
I’m glad you recognise that mocking is unacceptable, because it is not fun.
There is no problem having humour and fun on the forum as long as it is not at the expense of other people.
3 Likes