Mural appeal rejected by Niantic

The poi is not located on private property but in an allotment association and I have raised an objection and it was rejected by Niantic

The allotment garden lots themselves can be considered single private residential property. If this is the case and not a a non prp within the association, then this decision is correct.
Also, your photo makes it already ineligible due to your finger being in the photo

Maybe this varies by country but in the UK allotments are not single family private property, they are community places, often owned by the council or charities. They are considered good locations for waypoints as they are important to the community and multiple families access them.

I would also rate this photo as acceptable because you can clearly see the item. The thumb doesnt cover it, and a better photo can be uploaded as an edit.

I realise I’m disagreeing with an ambassador here but this feels to me to be contrary to the criteria that I’ve read where an image doesnt have to be perfect but needs to meet a minimum threshold and I feel this one does meet it.

1 Like

Ineligible is a bit harsh.

I see it as more of a error that anyone can make.

This is what the content guidelines say. Any body part on the photo makes it ineligible, even if it is not in focus.


1 Like

Sure, I’ve read it more than once.

I’m happy to not be too pedantic over a tiny error though

Then again, we have another place on the criteria website that does make a distinction of being the subject matter or not. Another case of criteria and guidelines that kind of contradict each other, like the graveyard post I made recently

I think we read this differently.

I see it says “dont submit photos of the following”

Ie a photo OF (focussed on) a body part.

A photo that happens to include a body part that is not the main focus doesn’t seem ineligible to me based on this critiera.

Maybe that is semantics but to me this is still not ineligible. I would expect it to say " do not submit photos including a body part" for this to be ineligible.

Does that make sense, even if you do not agree?

Error Bad Language?


Ha, yes, exactly! I had read both, and made my best assumption as to the overall meaning. Ie that an accidental thumb in a corner is fine, but a picture of someones hand would not be.

From the site I posted first, it does say “don’t submit of the following” and if it was that alone, I would agree. But the point in question says “includes … body parts”, so I don’t see understand it differently, semantically

I’m glad you didnt get to see the pictures I’ve submitted for some of the waypoints by the river… every image contains some sort of bird. It’s unavoidable :laughing:

They arent the focus of the picture though, so I think that is why they were accepted. They’re just sat on the roof of the building etc.

We also, I think, had guidance that there was some leeway on having people in the image in some busy spaces, which also led me to believe it’s about what the picture focusses on, not if there is something there in addition

Well I would also apply this for when it realistically isn’t possible at all to exclude all the ineligible object, animals and other stuff from photos, but I still would find the example in this post with the finger right in front of the lens having no room to do that



For me, its about whether the image clearly shows the nominated object. So, if the finger was in the way or quite prominent, I would of course reject. But this tiny bit in a corner I think is okay. I didnt notice it initially.

I also think the more important part is why anyone thinks allotments are single family private residential property? No one is living there, and the grounds tend to have 1 external fence and then a lot of plots inside, that are for 1 person/family to maintain, but they do not own it, and they arent separated by locked up fences etc. They are generally collaborative communal spaces with a lot of room for socialising

From your description of how it is in UK, there is a huge difference to Germany where they are completely fenced off and act as someone’s private garden basically

Also, people who rent a house also do not own it but it can still be a single private residential property, so that point doesn’t work that well.

And additionally, I don’t think you can say that just because someone doesn’t live there permanently, that it isn’t a single residential prp, I give you the pint though that the word “residential” in its own meaning and not the concept used on Wayfarer contexts is not fitting


I get that this submission is in Germany but they are very different here. I’m not going to adhere to Niantic’s guidelines on certain things even moreso when they don’t themselves.

Here I have marked in red what belongs to the allotment association

And at the coordinates there are already 3 wayspots

51.0999237, 13.9060917
51.0995487, 13.9040384
51.0998909, 13.9039426

if people can legally live there, isn’t that considered a private residence. Who cares who owns it, or if people are currently living there? a home is a home.

An allotment isnt a house. Its a place to grow plants. Unless you live in the shed of course, but there is likely a rule against that!

1 Like

The thing that’s now confusing me about this is that the area you’ve highlighted as the allotment seems to contain at least 4 paddling pools. I am assuming that these are not actually paddling pools if they’re on an allotment, but then that makes me wonder what they’re actually for.