I don’t think I said anything offensive. The one who feels offended here is me. And first, there’s no secure access (which isn’t true), and then there are flowers everywhere (literally, we’re talking about a country that has a Wikipedia page for its flowers because it has an event that’s been going on for 300 years (before Italy even existed). They’re nitpicking a sign just because it’s anonymous, but here we should be considering whether the sign has historical and identity relevance or not, and not whether it fits our personal tastes. That said, thanks for your help and lose the hassle.
"I hear your point about the sign being a bit ugly. But since Genzano di Roma is renowned for its flower festival, a sign saying ‘Welcome to Genzano di Roma - the city of flowers’ makes a lot of sense to promote local traditions. I think we have to look at its purpose rather than just whether we like it aesthetically. It seemed like you got quite upset about it on the street earlier; if you really feel strongly that it’s inappropriate, sharing your thoughts directly with the city hall might be a good next step
People in this public forum are free to express their thought on your nomination as long they remain respectful on other. People can voice their thought about your nomination, even if its not what you want to hear. You are free to take the advise or not to improve your nomination (resubmit or appeal)
The onus is still on submitter to convince reviewer to approve your nomination. Take a step back. Look into your nomination from other people perspective so that you can improve your nomination.
While I understand your point, the exact same principle applies in reverse. Reviewers and commenters also need to remain respectful. I honestly don’t understand why my comments are being framed as if I offended someone or incited hate, when I was simply responding in kind to obvious trolling.
I think this discussion is starting to go round in circles.
There are differences of opinion, and that is ok. Wayfarer is about judgement calls.
Feedback advice was sought, and it has been given. Perhaps it’s time to reflect?
If there is nothing more to be gained then I would suggest there is no need for further comment.
Proposta di Wayspot per Insegna Identitaria “Genzano: Città dell’Infiorata”
RM
Nominated in:IngressPokémon GO
Non accettate
2026-08-03 - Rejected
I revisori hanno fornito questi motivi principali per non aver accettato questa proposta:
- Il testo o la foto comprendono l’abuso, la derisione o le molestie nei confronti di una persona o di un gruppo specifici
Descrizione
Targa istituzionale permanente che identifica Genzano di Roma come “Città dell’Infiorata” posta dal Comune per celebrare la secolare identità artistica del territorio, famoso a livello internazionale per la storica manifestazione floreale nata nel 1778. L’Infiorata di Genzano è una delle manifestazioni floreali e artistiche più celebri d’Italia.
Posizione
Open in: GoogleOpenStreetMapIntelBingYandex
Local maps (
): Geoportale Nazionale*
1 Via Fatebenefratelli
Genzano di Roma, Lazio
Via Fatebenefratelli, 2, 00045 Genzano di Roma RM, Italia
Informazioni supplementari
<>
1 / 3
Questa candidatura riguarda ESCLUSIVAMENTE la targa metallica istituzionale superiore e permanente, posta dal Comune per celebrare il patrimonio culturale locale (L’Infiorata). Permanenza e Unicità: A differenza degli spazi pubblicitari sottostanti che cambiano, questa insegna superiore in metallo è fissa e storicamente presente da anni (verificabile tramite Google Street View). NON è un cartello stradale standard del Codice della Strada, ma una targa identitaria unica. Criteri: Soddisfa il criterio di “Luogo per l’esplorazione”: segna l’ingresso in una città con una forte connotazione storico-artistica (dal 1778). Accesso Sicuro: La struttura è situata a margine della carreggiata ma dispone di uno spazio pedonale/banchina calpestabile che permette di avvicinarsi in sicurezza. Grazie per la valutazione."
Hi @Pex988 , this nomination has already been extensively discussed here. I have therefore merged this post to the previous thread. Please re-read the feedback given before.
Trattandosi di una foto scattata con lo zoom che risultava sgranata, l’immagine è stata leggermente definita tramite uno strumento di miglioramento digitale per renderla più chiara. In ogni caso, il cartello e la sua esatta collocazione sono pienamente visibili e riscontrabili su Google Street View
"#### Ineligible photo
Photo includes one or more of emojis, tags, or personally identifiable information such as codenames, personal names or initials, or addresses; copyrighted material or watermarks, including screenshots of someone else’s photo; is obviously doctored; includes people, body parts, or live animals as the subject matter; is blurry, over/under exposed, taken inside a car, contains a watermark, or is improperly oriented."
Taken from Niantic Wayfarer
When something is “obviously doctored” is open to interpretation.
Whatever the current Rejection reason it does not change what was discussed in June. I stand by my comment…
I personallly heavily advice against editing photos with AI, if you do. At max, use normal non-AI image editing tools. I always check suspicious photos with the official image checkers from AI vendors and personally always abuse form report AI photos. In my personal opinion, you can consider yourself lucky that you didn’t get a suspension for that - although what you did to the photo specifically can be up for debate.
I think using the integrated AI to remove people in the background of photos etc is fine, and helpful for busy locations, but enhancing the entire image with AI is indistinguishable from generating it entirely so maybe not the best idea
I think opinions vary, which is fine.
Personally I wouldn’t go as far as removing people if it was mine to submit.
On the other hand I think it unlikely I would always spot it had happened.
Also what might just about acceptable on one photo may not in another case.
So I proceed with caution,