I have edited my post, hopefully this makes my comment clearer.
“Are more pokestops better for the game? Yes or no?”
This forum will say: no
The wider wayfarer community will say: yes
The entire Pokémon Go population will say: yes
Are more pokestops better for the game? Yes or no?
- Yes
- No
- I did not want to vote, but there is an option to reflect “do not want to vote”
0
voters
This is just your opinion and a loaded question.
The answer isn’t a simple Yes or No.
Are more pokestops needed in Rural “Wayspot Deserts” even my answer is Yes.
Should we get a stop in every L17 Cell. No, this would dilute the gameplay and stop the entire reason for the game being called Pokemon “Go”.
I don’t think the forum here says no. To my understanding wayfarer is game agnostic. So the focus for wayspots is diffrent.
visto che è un esperimento aiuto nel feedback dicendo questo: stavo valutando e mi appare questa richiesta, nei dintorni 22 nuovi waystop, ma come potete vedere nell’immagine sotto ci sono due waystop nella stessa cella e non penso ci siano tutti e due in pogo quindi bisogna stare un pochino attenti a mettere nuovi waystop in celle diverse, in più in teoria quello in basso è su un casa con una sola famiglia (personalmente non mi è mai piaciuta questa cosa ma le regole sono regole) quindi bisogna stare un pochino attenti anche qui. se però poi dite che essendo waystop vostri possono non rispettare le vostre regole sto zitto. ho messo solo un esempio ma erano presenti altre 3/4 celle uguali (non sono quindi tantissimi su 22 però è un feedback)
Based on examples visible her - terrible. In case game need some more stops/gyms it is OK to add some “fake” ones as “NianticCorner” to clearly show this place is not eligible in fact but as needed more wayspots it was artificially added.
Such a corner submitted by myself - I can imagine ban for it. Community is not approving much nicer locations,..
I think you have missed the point of wayfarer which is to map interesting locations. This improves Niantic’s games by adding more locations, but also improves their map as a whole which likely informs decisions and also enabled the product to be sold as a data source.
I do not know why you think more PoIs in an area is a bad thing. A cluster of stops in a new town makes me want to walk there because I know it will be somewhere interesting with things to do. A bare or very regular pattern of stops across a town or other area won’t tell me as much. Also why shouldn’t a historic area of a town be absolutely stuffed full of PoIs? It’s an interesting place where walking tours happen because there’s so much to see! The games should reflect that.
This was not the question being asked.
I agree that some areas are desperate for more waypoints.
The question was not about wayspots but adding more in to Pokemon Go.
Out of context, I don’t think more POIs is a bad thing just that Flooding the map is.
Most towns already have “a cluster” and I am not against this. Perfect places for Raid Days etc.
Historic towns usually are already “stuffed” and as above, I have no problem with this.
If there is so much to see shouldn’t you be spending your time enjoying your surroundings instead of playing the game.
Go and explore the town / city / large park / tourist area and have plenty to interact with.
My problem is where people think that the entire map should be stuffed, that reviewers should accept everything because “more is better”.
People are not wanting their street to be stuffed so they can explore, they want it to make the game easier.
I can easily do both, thanks.
Why should it be artificially harder? Plus less for wayfarers to do if your ideas happened. What would be the point anymore?!
Nothing artificial about it. It’s the real world and there are more “interesting” POIs in some places than others.
Why? My suggestions in this and others threads does not restrict how many “eligible” waypoints can be added to the wayfarer database, just the amount to be used as stops / gyms in “over populated areas”. Maybe Niantic could implement a system where they occasionally rotate in a way that powerspots do? The others could be used as real world powerspots instead of relying on the “imports”. Maybe a new feature is implemented that can also use them.
I really liked this comment about Go.
It would be great to see more rewards around the go part of it. As a kid growing up with the TV series and then my own kids growing up with it. Half the series premise seemed to be adventure. Get out. Explore. Go out. Go explore. Go discover.
So with POIs everywere in every cell. Is that GO. Does it just become stop.
I get the issue rural areas have. I don’t think there should be flooding. I think the decision to place Generic waypoints should be wisely considered. The consensus of generic title. Generic description with Generic Wayfarer Logo FOR non standard POIs is wise for a range of reasons.
I would hazard there is a minimum that drives the dollar return that is required to run the system. This is not a charity. It is a business. For better or worse it means some decisions will annoy people. But as a business it needs to satisfy shareholders. I enjoy playing so if it means the game survives probably worth while adapting. does not mean our voices should not be heard. And most changes to date have been OK except where there is bloatware and little oppurtunity to switch off the bits that bloat the old mobile. And most of us have grown used to all the changes. Change shock drives outrage but after a while we are still here so hey the change worked. This looks no difference
yet
We know some areas need more POIS. But we know there is already rubbish in the system. Putting more rubbish on display will only make it worse. So the key here is - how can the new system minimise that risk but ensure new POIs can exist. Reading the views above there are solutions to this. 
But yes. More of the GO less of the STOP
I know I’m a bit late to the party here, so if someone’s already said this, consider this a HEARTY+1.
First off, I think this is great! Expanding gameplay in low-density areas is such a positive move, and I really appreciate Niantic experimenting to make things more accessible for everyone.
As a side note (and I say this with a smile), I keep seeing debates about “purist map logic”… and honestly, I’m sure there’s a reason behind it, but the purpose still escapes me. Maybe that’s on me! 
What I do notice is that if Niantic continues to fill in the gaps - which I suspect might become increasingly common - we could eventually see a world where Wayfarer spots make up the minority of the map.
And honestly? I’m okay with that. I’d just hate for the community review aspect to lose relevance because we’re too rigid about what should or shouldn’t count. Maybe it’s time to loosen up some of those hard lines and remember why we started contributing in the first place.
Just a hypothetical observation: one of those “this is why we can’t have nice things” musings. "
I live in an area with low wayspot density, and I think this will be great for the game and the players. Thank you.
The community review aspect depends on being able to decide which submissions meet criteria. The individual Wayfarer rating is based on agreements and disagreements, and it is very difficult to keep a great rating when we aren’t all reviewing by the same criteria. I feel a smaller and smaller percentage of the reviewers actually try to understand criteria. It isn’t about being rigid, it is about applying the criteria consistently.
So all generic bus stops and generic street name signs (usually at the corners of the streets) will be points of interest?
I marked them specifically as generic and NOT a POI so far.
Am I wrong than?
What criteria should be given to those generic spots?
Good for:
- Exploration
- Exercise
- Socializing
Asking to learn and to put things into perspective.
Welcome to the forums.
Absolutely not. They are trash submissions and should be rejected as not Permanent and Distinct. (Not as generic business, as they aren’t businesses). Continue to reject them!
Bus stops might at some point become eligible, but they are not at the moment.
Street corners are not eligible, but - as far as I can tell - Niantic have created confusion in some areas by using street corners to add pokestops into Pokemon Go without clearly indicating that they are imports and not to be used as guidelines for wayspot submissions.
Generic street name signs are simply ineligible.
Your question is answered in the post I reccomend reading it fully.
[quote=“NianticTintino, post:1, topic:109242”]
**Are ALL street corners now eligible?** Nope! Wayspot nominations by Wayfinders still need to comply with Wayspot criteria. Niantic generated Wayspots like these are meant to address game play gaps in areas that need them.
[/quote]
No.
This is strictly an exceptional measure implemented to improve the game experience for PoGo Trainers and does not align with Wayfarer’s approval criteria.
If you submit such spots, they may be reviewed as fraudulent activity and banned.
This could significantly impair your game experience.
However, I understand why you might think this.
Because Wayfarer team staff import the most invalid wayspots.
And they don’t indicate that these are import spots intended to improve the game experience.
In this situation, it’s only natural to make mistakes.
I think it’s wrong for the Wayfarer team to be doing this.
Because the Wayfarer team isn’t directly responsible for improving the game experience.
Their job is to properly manage the Wayspots used in the game.
This is the job of the respective game teams, starting with PoGo.