Mysterious Interpretation of Criteria

In my village there are not that many items one can nominate as stops. It is a small village in a rural area, graffiti is not a thing here, and interesting art or monuments are always several in one cell :-(. But…we do have public meeting places in residential area’s : rather then visiting each other at home, people from a neighborhood meet on these ‘Treffpunkte’ , for a coffee or - when the evening proceeds - a beer. They really promote socializing, and as the village is not that large and many people know each other, so they meet each other in these places in different neighborhoods as well.

I nominated three of these, and all were approved pretty quick, as they should. They are permanent, and some have been there over decades.

But the next two I nominated were declined, one even REALLY fast, the INSTANT I accidentily upgraded one that was still in voting.

As I am still trying to wrap my head around the exact interpretation of the guidelines, I am wondering what I am missing : can you, knowing the guidelines, guess which ones were accepted and which were not, and most of al, WHY ? Did I do something wrong ? Or is this, too, a random thing an should I just keep nominating them hoping for a good day ?

1 Like

I am going to guess that 3 and 5 were the immediate rejects - 3 for private property and 5 for pedestrian access

Or 2 and 4 because the benches look less interesting

Or coinflip for any of them!

I think they could have all been accepted as long as the submissions were clear and well written. For avoidance of doubt I dont think they were on private property or had issues with access or that the bench style has an impact on the social value

All are save pedestrian acces (how on EARTH would people be able to reach them and go back home after a few beers if it weren’t ? They are all in pedestrian- zones (Fussgängergebiet, max 10 kmh, often only 5kmh, like walking speed only) in very safe residential area’s. Of course all nominations had very clear pictures of the whole area.

It’s actually 1 (!!) and 4. For number 4 I ‘blame’ ML, but number one is in my opinion one of the best, the largest and the most permanent.

These are adorable little places to gather with a neighbor! I wish we had these here. I would recommend you post each rejected one in Nomination Support along with the rejection reasons showing and the full nomination including main and supporting photos and title, description, and supporting text. Location helps a lot for advice so we can see what reviewers saw on Maps, but is not necessary if you think that gives away your privacy. It is also useful to know if this was a rejection by “our team” or “the community” according to the email you received.


People see what might be a road, and assume its like hot lava or something so cant possibly accept things in the middle of “roads” even if said roads are in residential streets or other places where traffic is slow moving or non existant.

I wasnt saying Id have rejected it for this reason but that is a potential reviewer thought process


Number 1 One only said ‘not accepted’ without ANY clarification. Not even ‘Wayfairer criteria’ or ’ general business’ , just ‘not accepted’ . Which, of course, is a great way to learn what you did wrong :wink:

Number 4 came with quite a novel though, AFTER I appealed upon ML decline :

’ Thanks for the appeal, Explorer! The object in question does not meet the Wayfarer criteria as it is a normal Meeting point. If this assessment is not accurate, please resubmit the nomination with additional context. We recommend you review the Wayspot Criteria before submitting your next Wayspot contribution: (link)’

I will, of course, renominate, because what makes a meeting point eligible or too ‘normal’ to be eligible ? No idea what ‘additional context’ I should add to the same text I used on the other nominations.

Oh, nice, we have seen a lot of “normal” things recently that typically meet criteria :laughing: even a “normal information board” which was an awesome info board all about seals that you’d think was an auto-accept!!


So its basically a matter of time before we get items rejected for being normal roadside chapel, a normal painted utility box, a normal trail marker, a normal playground, a normal basketball court, a normal soccer field, a normal gym, a normal pub, a normal statue and a normal church ? We might as well stop nominating then. Everything is as normal or as exceptional as you want it to be.

Being a Dutch woman living in Germany, there is NOTHING normal for me about these Treffpunkte, they are all a bit different, and they still surprise me (and I still have a few to discover), or about those weird Jesus-chapels that are literally everywhere, most just outsid the village. But I can’t bear to see another basic ‘directional sign’ for bicycles that litterally cover all of the Netherlands, like every crossroads. And they are allways a slamdunk…


can you post a screenshot of the rejected nomination without any rejection reason showing on the contributions page? i thought this had been fixed for a long time now, so the team needs to know if it is happening again.

Sometimes they mix it up so you get “general sign” or “regular sign” instead of “normal sign” :laughing:

1 Like

:saluting_face: :placard:


Private Property

1 Like

I like combination of criteria as a rejection. It’s extremely helpful.

1 Like

This rejection came less then one minute after I accidentily upgraded it. It had been in voting for over a week before that.


ty - interesting! and nothing comes up when you refresh the page? And it was a community decision.

Indeed, when I refreshed the page, it said ’ other rejection criteria’ . Really helpfull…


ty again and i agree it doesn’t help.

I agree that the message is not clear and there is room for improvement and we are constantly working towards that.

Having said that, I was able to locate this nomination. The object cannot exist at the location this nomination was submitted at. It is definitely misplaced (comparing the Wayspot image, supporting image and the available imagery at the location). Moreover, the submitted location is a private residential property and that makes it ineligible even if we consider the submitted location to be correct.


Excuse me ?? Perhaps you should come by and check ? It is a bit hard to see on Maps, but it is in the angle in the yellow circle, and I pinpointed it exactly where it is. Which does not always work quite accurately depending on my reception, but here it worked well.

As you can see it is at the side of the road, outside the private property. The area photo is taken from the other side of the road. looking into the street on the left.

This is not the submission you got that response for. This nomination was rejected by the community.