Perhaps “municipality sign” placed by the city or local jurisdiction vs the estate marks (unless culturally significant)?
I like “estate signs” but then that makes me think of private estates. No wonder they haven’t made a clarification if I can’t make it clear what I need clarified. 
1 Like
Assuming that your in england it could be accepted. These signs are common in towns and villages near me and I’ve seen loads of them recently accepted as poi’s. Heres an example and it looks something like yours
Its permanent and towering over the nearby playground. Come one … who would be tempted to thumbs up that?
I’d thumbs that up all day as a unique, artistic sign/sculpture worthy of exploration - but in that case it would be acceptable, in my opinion, as an artwork and not as a location pin for “a nice neighborhood that’s great to walk around”. It’s pretty cool, and I’d want to go see it myself! I agree, though, that signs can be confusing. I try to think about what’'s actually being submitted when I review: are they submitting the sign as a standalone object, or as a location pin for an area? If a location pin for an area, is that area itself eligible? Most signs I see as Wayspots in my local area are either location pins for restaurants, churches, or other eligible spots - or are signs that are eligible in their own right, like Nature or History signs with interesting text, or artistic and unique hand-crafted signs. I try to judge each based on its merits and adherence to criteria, and this sign for MTA meets the Exploration criteria for me quite nicely.
3 Likes
Yes, fully agree with your approach. I do road trips and have always said I stopped at xxxx because they wanted me to. The trouble and expense they went to – to have a big, arty, unusual or sign with extras — tells me they want you to stop, visit, eat, explore, shop, consider living their etc. Makes you curious.
Each on merits …
This is one that just showed up last week and really irks me for some reason.
Under what criteria could it have been accepted?
At least, it is a well done photo.
yes … that one (to me) is just like a street sign. It is not really pulling me to check the place out.
“frontier village” is intriguing for me but they do need to do more with a sign to guarantee I will stop
Yup. Where they torn down the amusement park Frontier Village - Wikipedia and built a several subdivisions.
Lots of interesting stuff inside the left over city park, but this sign is not one of them.
住民の方に迷惑になる場合があるからじゃないですかね
No, as hisotric or artistic signs can be eligible.
1 Like
Wow, I just skipped something similar because I wasn’t sure, but my gut was to reject it. Yet, here it is as a featured wayspot.
I’ve had the same.
This thread has been going on for quite a while!
I scrolled back to find the @1Todoelmundo post that you quoted, since it seemed to be a bit misguided. Fortunately, @thenamelesskath had already addressed the problems.
I’m re-quoting them to spare others from having to scroll all the way back.
;tldr: Always be careful near the edges of single-family private residential property all the way to the outside of any outer walls or fences, and don’t nominate things that are contrary to acceptance guidelines or fall within rejection constraints.
There are no exclusion zones around objects except for houses on sfprp and whatever is current policy about not blocking emergency services.
Valid nominations should not be rejected simply for being near to something that was or should have been rejected.
I can nominate in Ingress & Pokemon GO. After NW was created, I did nominate a neighborhood sign to try provide another Wayspot. I actually withdrew that nomination. I usually reject most neighborhood signs and all street signs and shopping center signs. Unless I can see the sign being eligible, I have difficulty accepting. Yes, this thread has been ongoing for some time.
1 Like
