Low quality wayspots and other things that get approved and nominated

The previous thread got closed because it went in the wrong direction and became unconstructive. I was told that I can create a new one, and I promised I’ll try to be constructive and nice.

So here’s it goes.

New wayspot in a nearby college, smack in the middle of the field:

Would be much better to have it on the sidelines close to where the entrance to the field is so that it doesn’t interfere with any activities, as suggested in Content Guidelines — Wayfarer Help Center.

While this other new wayspot in the same college is not in the middle of the field, it’s still on the field, and again - putting it on sidelines closer to the entrance would make more sense:

This wayspot is on a school territory, which is not allowed per https://niantic.helpshift.com/hc/en/21-wayfarer/faq/2774-rejection-criteria/:

This wayspot is also on a school territory, although it’s a bit harder to tell:

Trees, bushes and other flora planted on or around residential or business territory don’t constitute a garden - it’s not abnormal to beautify the area to make it more attractive (and charge more money):


I’m uncertain what sort of response you are seeking so here goes.

The 2 examples of pin placement on the football field are useful to discuss as that is all part of working through the judgement calls.

First there could be perfectly good solid reasons why the pins are placed where they are. What we have is a satelite image. We don’t know the date of the image or the date when the nomination was made (since there can be a substantial time gap between being made and approved I focus on being made).
The set up of field layout could have been different, so what looked ok at the time of submission does not look ok on this image. This makes me cautious about some moves.

If the pitches were laid out as shown based on goal posts then the original pin would be fine and the yellow point you suggest would now not be on any pitch.

So if a move is to happen there needs to be something that shows. The current layout and if it is a space with various arrangements a pin that avoids interfering with any would be best.

Second case

All of the above about field layout applies.
I can’t make out where the sideline is. The wayspot looks very close to where the sideline would be. So if it is on the field then Itis not on by much. In my opinion probably no need to move it and if I did I would just move it a metre or so to ensure it is off the field of play. There is no need to move it a larger distance to your yellow dot.
Where you might place it if submitting for first time is a different question.
Both of the above are good quality wayspots overall.

The 2 on school property can simply be reported and removed. There is nothing to discuss.
I don’t have enough information about the community garden.


I am not seeking any response. I am just showing things that got nominated approved and how they could have been done better or if they shouldn’t have been approved.

Also, you are very wrong about the fields. Very, very wrong. You are making assumptions based just on screenshots and trying to justify why this might be OK, while I actually checked the maps and different views and angles before saying why this is wrong.

That’s fine if there are no expectations, so it’s fine to discuss.
If you read carefully my discussion about the football fields has could/if etc. I wasn’t saying this is an absolute answer and certainly not justifying anything specific. But rather using your post to get people to to open up their thinking about such situations.

In short I’m saying it’s not simple.

I only have screenshots to go on as does everyone that reads this post so if you have additional information then include it. Have you been and taken recent pictures? Current photos would be helpful if trying to decide a new placement.

I certainly don’t see any necessity to move the second one anything other. Than a short distance. The sideline is just as acceptable as anywhere else.

Have you reported the 2 at a school, I do hope so.


You are being counter-constructive. While I try to explain that these locations should have been chosen better based on the research I did, you are trying to explain why these locations could be OK based on the limited information from which you draw assumptions. Your assumptions are wrong, and your explanations are wrong.

Yes, good to know you understand.
There is no absolute right or wrong. They are not the best words to use when so much of Wayfarer is subjective.

You posted your view. Perhaps you should be more open to considering that other options are possible.

It’s complex in Wayfarer and there are often several equally correct options.
If you take the Wayfarer Teams simple graphic from the criteria clarification

You will see 2 equally correct positions, the text is clear that there is no one position that it should be.
It’s a judgement call. Because we have reached that decision of course we feel it is right, but we all need to be open to the possibility that someone else might be equally right.

It doesn’t make a nomination bad because as a reviewer your judgement is different.

As reviewers we need to consider carefully before moving any point during review. We don’t know how it works but many have observed that some end up in strange positions.


The guideline you posted clearly says that putting a wayspot in the middle of a sports field is not a good idea, and yet you try to justify putting wayspots inside sports fields.

No I haven’t.
I have raised the point that given the limited information……in otherwords based on the fact that I haven’t actually visited the place there could be different outcomes.

1 Like

You tried to justify locations inside the fields by making assumptions based on limited information, even though I mentioned that they are at a nearby college, meaning a college close to me, meaning I know the area and I have more information than I provided here.

Please double-check your spelling:


(It’s “picnic”, btw)

On that note:

You can always go to Niantic Wayfarer to check the status your nominations and make edits like correcting spelling and grammatical errors or adding more information.

Yes always good practice to check and edit your spelling. It is easy sometimes in the rain and on a small screen to mistype.
You need to quick to ensure it doesn’t go into voting before you do the check.
In terms of reviewing this is something that is alllowable. Personally I would mark this as I don’t know under accuracy and tick the boxes for title and description. Then assess any other elements of the submission.


Some players allow anything inaccurate and then have other players fix it, not understanding that a nomination is not just a POI - it’s a combination of a POI, its photo, its location, its title and its description. According to Reviewing a Wayspot Nomination — Wayfarer Help Center, we are supposed to give thumbs up to “Titles and descriptions with correct spelling/capitalization/grammar”. While it doesn’t say what to give to titles and descriptions with incorrect spelling, it’s fine to reject them if you feel so (which I did in the above case of “pocknic”) and put “bad spelling” or something like this here:


This would give the submitter the idea of what needs to be fixed so that their nomination gets accepted after they re-submit it.

There is no reason to mark “I don’t know” under accuracy if you know that spelling is incorrect.

The submitter will never see that you typed in “Bad Spelling”. I think they will only see “Other rejection reason” or something like that.


Source: wayfarer faq


I select “I don’t know” in these scenarios because “I don’t know how Niantic wants me to review these.”

I’ll also add that improper spelling is not a rejection reason, so it seems inappropriate to :-1: for that reason.


One time I rejected a nomination for misspelling.
The wayspot was called something with stadion. Meant was station.
The difference in what a visitor is expected to visit was to drastically.


My “lack of understanding” means I accept minor typos or misspellings where the reader will still be able to read it easily.

I would say maybe there is a lack of understanding elsewhere that people do not always have the time to correct typos, do not know the wayfarer website exists, have a wet screen, or are dyslexic, or writing in a non-native language. I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt and let locals edit to fix it.

Better to have a good waypoint with a typo than an upset submitter who maybe doesnt try again


Then I guess Niantic will need to fix that, so that if reviewers want to point out spelling errors, submitters get that and re-submit with errors corrected.

I have one nomination on hold (not an edit, actual nomination for a new wayspot), and I can edit its title, description and supporting info.

My understanding of IDK option is “I don’t know if this location is safe” or “I don’t know if the information is accurate” or “I don’t know if this is a good place to exercise”. If you don’t know what you should do with spelling and grammar errors, maybe we should ask Niantic for a clarification in Criteria Clarification Collection - Discussion.

We are told to give thumbs up for correct spelling and grammar, so I believe it matters, even though we aren’t explicitly told to reject incorrect spelling or bad grammar. My guess why we aren’t explicitly told that is because it could be one spelling error or a missing comma in a long description (which most of us would be OK with), or it could be 1/3 of words in title and description misspelled in a really weird way (like with “pocknic”).

1 Like