So this year im trying to do hillwalking every week, and one kf the things on my list is called the whangie
Google Search
Its a natural feature in scotland, but its a tourist attraction. I was expecting it to be a portal but when i checked the map i was shocked to see it wasnt. There is a trig stone nearby thats also a portal, but to me the whangie itself should be one. So im wondering what other people think. It does meet exploration criteria, and it does meet exercise as you have to hillwalk to it
1 Like
It would be rejected for being a natural feature; that’s just how the rules are. Even something as outstanding as Antelope Canyon doesn’t have a wayspot for either upper or lower - only the POIs such as plaques, historic houses etc.
I would not generalize natural features as ineligible. The difficulty is going to be finding an anchor. I would maybe try a photo like this one I borrowed on Google Maps:
or the one seen here The Whangie, Kilpatrick Hills.
It is definitely going to be a struggle. I would approve something like this, fwiw.
2 Likes
Decided to double check, as its been a while since i actually read the rejection critera, theres no natural feature rejection in the criteria pge anymore. To be clear, i dont think that means a random tree or soemthing should pass, but this here is a tourist attraction that encourages exercise and exploration, so id say its worthy of at leadt being attempted
Funnily enough, i just found that website today and have been using it to llan walks, though it has a weird choice for some of the walks, taking the harder directions lol
Haha this is in no way an endorsement of the website’s route choices 
Shows how much I don’t notice things. You’re right. There is nothing to prevent natural features being wayspots, they are just a very difficult thing to get past eMiLy (which seems to detest nature) and reviewers (such as ones who don’t keep up-to-date with criteria).
Oh yeah, forgot, emily hates nature … or the colour green possibly lol
I mean, i havent gone through them all yet but when i was browsing insaw the croy hill one takes the route that has the steep hills, i do the route the opposite direction as it means theres only 1 steepish hill and the rest are less steep lol
1 Like
Here is what that referenced AMA said about nature:
November 2020 Wayfarer AMA
Question: Natural features were previously explicitly excluded from eligibility but are now listed as examples of good Wayspots. Can you provide more information about any requirements for these locations?
Niantic: Good question! It’s true that these are now up for consideration as eligible Wayspots. Famous waterfalls and lagoons, or popular cenotes and lakes are great places to explore. When considering these, think about whether there’s a specific location you can direct people to: a sign, an informational board, etc. Additionally, think about whether this natural feature is “just a random rock/tree” (which would be a poor nomination) or whether it’s a named feature with a famous backstory and/or a history (a great nomination!).
Posting for the historical reference to when the natural features “rule” was changed.
They’ve still got a vestige left from the old, no-natural-features rejection criterion.
In the Rejection Criteria, under ineligible photos, along with the obvious car dashboard, tilted, blurry, watermarked, etc., they show a scenic view of a waterfront dock on a lake, but there’s no longer any text to support that rejection!
I would greatly prefer to nominate that location with a pretty photo from afar rather than a close-up of a signboard if there even is one, but I don’t know of a way to get that accepted unless there happens to be a bench at the overlooking location.