Yeah… I now wish I had taken a couple… I mean it is good to see eMiLy has not rejected.
But it is now taking longer. I would love to know since eMiLy came on stream did the number of reviewers drop. Now eMiLy off line does that mean the queue is way way longer.
I know upgrades worked really well. Currently I have one in queue and it remains in queue even though older than some now in voting. I could use upgrades. But I am not fussed and just watching how it all plays out
I know I am reviewing heaps. But due to the quality I wonder if I am pushing out the review times as I am at odds to other reviewers…So the queue grows
Still nothing? I’m getting annoyed by my trail marker submissions getting rejected by reviewers for “generic business” when the AI would’ve approved them all in a day.
About two weeks ago, during the Unova Tour, I followed a local hiking trail I found that I noticed had a lot of markers that hadn’t been submitted as Wayspots yet, so I got to work.
Now the results are slowly coming in and it’s one nonsensical rejection after the other. Various combinations of “generic business”, “fake nomination”, “abuse”, “unsafe access”. I literally walked this entire trail two weeks ago. None of these nominations are fake. All of them are safe to access. It’s a hiking trail in a city. They’re not letting people hike through dangerous areas.
It’s just the same usual elitist reviewers who think trail markers don’t “deserve” to be approved, even though the Niantic criteria explicitly say otherwise.
I am done with human reviewers. Fix the AI already.
***mod edit
I have been (strongly) against those “educational emails” but since they have been improved with examples of what the recipient of the email did wrong, you may want to start going to help chat with reports of incorrect reviewing. I believe @kawin240 had been submitting some of these kinds of reports and might be able to advise how to submit them.
One or two bad decisions I just appeal, but if they all are being rejected for wrong reasons, the reviewers need education.
A list of rejection reasons like that is disheartening.
I have a long trail that I am submitting and I shouldn’t have to feel that I have to cross my fingers and hope for a good outcome for each one.
It’s especially disheartening knowing the AI would’ve had them all in the game by Monday. Now it’s either resubmitting them and hoping that the almighty reviewers look upon me with favor this time, or use all of my appeals for the next 5 months and hope the people working the Appeals desk know what the rules are, which is also not a given.
When submitting Hike Trails, always make sure to add a Link to a trail map in the supporting Info. This way the location can be proven by reviewers as part of the trail, even if the sign itself isnt on street view.
Even then, sometimes reviewers reject those, but they will most likely go through with an appeal. Also the chance of getting hike trails approved is much higher if you can provide a Trail Map.
I’m using this Site mostly, because it has lots of trails mapped:
its mostly in Europe, but it has lots of trails that don’t have official sites and its also a good way to find hiketrails to map them in Wayfarer.
If you submitted a Map, this of course doesnt apply to you, but its generally good advice, so i thought it would be good to share.
Does anybody else get massive amounts of incorrect third party photo rejections by ML? Even photos i never Published are now rejected. This is around 80% of my and my families rejected nominations last 2 weeks or so. The problem is around a month old for me.
“Our team” emails can mean human or ai review. I have only seen the 24 hour decisions we attribute to ML reject for “Duplicate” or “Wayfarer criteria.” Did you get these “Third party photo” rejections around 20-24 hours after submitting?
I think they are basing this off of what they have said in these posts:
Staff has address their issues, and it doesn’t appear to be an issue with ML, more an issue with trying to repurpose but unable to provide proof that the artwork has changed.
Edit: I can say that ML is not rejecting all nominations and edits with 3rd party photos; some are getting past ML from time to time.
For example, someone in the area of my bonus location was submitting several nominations using photos taken from 3rd party websites recently, and I made sure to report all the nominations for repeated abusive behavior about 2 weeks ago. Some of the photos, both main and supporting, were being taken from social media, news articles, Google Maps, even screenshots from Google Street View. I haven’t seen any nominations from that area using 3rd party photos for about 2 weeks since I filed the report.
We have advised you to post your nominations/edits in the Nomination Support topic, as there may be other issues than just the photos that are causing ML to reject, and right now, ML can only reject new nominations. The one that you did share did have some issues, so it’s very possible that the others could use some improvements as well.
