I go with what it could be if I’m not sure.
Trail: Yes/No - could be, so yes. Shrug.
My assumption is that these categories are used for analysis and possibly by the ML to help it understand what things are. I doubt it has any bearing on eligibility so I don’t agonise over it
From an analytics perspective I’d say having a category vs not is beneficial, hence why Id err on allocating a category over not.
Unless I’ve missed something the categories at the bottom of a review have no impact on a submission being accepted or rejected.
If someone had a great playground submission in a community park and somehow selected pond, school and farmland, reviewers could click no on all those and thumb up all the other things and once voting was done, become a waypoint.
I look at the title of the submission.
So if a trail marker is nominated then that is the only one I mark as “yes”. Sure I may think it’s a trail as well and also a nature reserve but I mark these “no” as that’s not what is nominated. If none on the list look right or relate to the nomination title I will mark them all “no”.
You do get the opportunity to suggest a category at the bottom if you feel none are quite right and you want to.
My reasoning is that once you get to this stage you have already voted to accept or not accept the nomination.
With the main questions I go with what I feel. So if I don’t know I’m happy to select that option.