Hi, there! I could use some help with a particular nomination that comes up every now and then. It is when the object in the featured photo seems temporary—usually a sign that appears flimsy or otherwise impermanent—but the business named in the sign is verified, via satellite map imagery, and seemingly permanent in the pinned location. Below is an example though not the best one I’ve seen since the sign appears a bit more sturdy than some that I’ve seen.
Please tell me your thoughts on the nomination above. Per the criteria, I’m stuck on “Permanent and Distinct” while all the other criteria are a thumbs up.
In addition, what if the sign was made of fabric? A fabric sign suggests to me impermanence as though it is taken down and put back up on different days. I welcome any learned input that will help me with these types of nominations.
I do see some “temporary” signs when maybe the business is getting new signage so the current sign is a stop gap. I would say you are nominating the business if you believe that is permanent then it should be eligible.
In regards to this nomination in particular, I would Reject as Generic Business. It’s not somewhere you go to exercise, just where you buy the equipment.
I appreciate your input! I, too, am swayed by the idea that this business appears permanent while the sign seems flimsy and possibly impermanent.
Please clarify “Generic Business.” Based on the Wayfarer definition—“A generic business, chain, or franchise that is not uniquely important to the local community”—I would not consider this business generic because it is not a chain or franchise and certainly could be important to the local community. I think I understand how you’re applying the term “generic” to this nomination, but I do not define “generic” as you do. I would love if others would clarify this. If I’m wrong, I’d like to adjust my approach to this criterion.
A “generic business” would be one that does not meet any of the criteria as a great place for exercise, exploration, or being social.
Chain gyms can be excellent wayspots. Hobby stores can be excellent wayspots. Superstores and gas stations, not so much.
But then again, a Buc-ee’s (gas station chain with more!) can be a tourist attraction in its own right. So you have to consider each business individually and what it does for the community.
Thanks for the clarification, Cyndiepooh. I welcome your input about the example I share above. First, would you consider this a “generic business” and reject it for this reason? Second, please let me know your thoughts on what appear to be flimsy, possibly temporary, signs that are the proposed object. The sign in this example is arguably flimsy—again, not the best example I’ve seen. I’ve seen signs made of fabric, evidenced by the way they are draped and tacked in place. If a nomination for a permanent business, confirmed by a satellite map image, featured a main photo of what appears to be a temporary sign, would you give “Permanent and Distinct” a thumbs up? As I mentioned, my goal is to improve my assessment process of Waystop nominations.
I agree with @SlimboyFat71 that this seems to just be a place to purchase equipment, so it would be generic.
The sign itself I could pass. A sign is rarely eligible on its own merits. It usually is eligible as a visual anchor for the thing it represents. If I were convinced that the business the sign represents were eligible, I would accept this sign to represent that business.
It is very hard to make a blanket statement about anything in Wayfarer. Apologies if my answer appears to be a bit waffly.
Edited to add that we have a lot of skips we can use every 24 hours, I believe 100. If you come upon another one you don’t feel good about accepting, you can screenshot that review and ask here. You can skip if you don’t get an answer quickly enough.
I really appreciate your input, Cyndiepooh. Your pointing out that “a sign is rarely eligible on its own merits” but is “a visual anchor for the thing it represents” is most helpful for my thought process when assessing. I also appreciate your clarification about “generic business.” I will expand my definition of it to include businesses that do not provide unique products or services.
While I have your ear, I’d like to ask an off-topic question: When the object is a plaque on a memorial bench and the title and description simply state the name of the person memorialized WITHOUT stating what made that person special in the community, should we approve or reject the nomination? I’m asking because I believe I have read here in the community forum that a memorial plaque nomination must state what made that person unique—otherwise, it seems “generic” and should be rejected.
Thank you, @paulingzubat, for confirming that a description of what makes the person honored by a memorial bench notable in the community is required for such a nomination.
I have a follow-up question regarding memorial benches and Agreements. Memorial benches are a good example of my concern. I wonder if the majority of Wayfarer reviewers are aware that they should reject a memorial bench that fails to state what made the notable person important to the community. This is just one of several nuances that concern me. Another is that a Little Free Library that is planted on single-family private residential property should be rejected. I follow this rule but suspect that I am not in “Agreement” with other reviewers. How can I increase my profile rating if the popular “Agreement” is to approve memorial benches without evidence of the person’s importance and Little Free Libraries on private property? I’d appreciate any advice as I feel invested in Wayfarer’s goals and boundaries and would like to see this reflected in my Agreements summary.
Most nuances are not readily available at the beginning tier of Wayfarer. In this current setup, Wayfinders can progress through the Champion tier without even interacting with the forum, the clarifications library, or even rechecking the criteria pages. Awareness of the criteria greatly varies per region.
The uninformed continue to be so until corrected. Corrections often come in the form of warning emails, outright bans; legitimate understanding and reading the pages and forum less so (from what I can see).
I do not have a definite solution to raising your agreement rate. What we can do is inform other Wayfinders and reporting ineligible wayspots that are in the database. That way we can also prevent the bans or prevent other Wayfinders from learning from bad examples in the long run. You may do so at your discretion, participation is voluntary but highly encouraged. As is submitting and reviewing wayspots.
In the long run, you will get more agreements when reviewing by criteria and clarifications than trying to guess whether the community will accept it. I am also frustrated when things that should not have been accepted go live on the map. I don’t know that there is an easy solution to the problem of reviewers not reviewing correctly.
Just to return to this, don’t just think of Unique.
Remember that all nominations must meet at least 1 of the following…
“Encourage” you to Socialise.
“Encourage” you to Exercise.
“Encourage” you to Explore.
I use the word “Encourage” as you can do these almost anywhere but most don’t encourage it.
"You and a mate (socialise) walk to the store (exercise) to (explore) why they have a temporary sign. " Doesn’t count…
Just for extreme lets say a car dealer that only sells blue cars. Unique = Yes but still doesn’t meet the big 3 criteria.
You should always review to the criteria, maybe make a note of any you believe will go against what you think then check back when it will have been decided.
If you are getting loads then think “Am I the one in the wrong”.
With your examples a LFL on SFPRP reported with evidence will always be removed. The benches are more nuanced as we don’t know what they stated in Supplemental and therefor they don’t usually get removed.
" Doesn’t count…