Sometimes it really upsets me as they deny my appeal for a wayspot because of some mistake and than guide you to resubmit the entire submission again.
I feel like the ‘‘upgrades’’ that we get for submission to be checked faster should be redeemable for a second opinion where you could appeal your nomination for the second time.
I’ve been denied a few time and marked as a duplicate, because someone did a poor job and didn’t look at the photo properly that there are two similar buildings/places close by. (example: submitting a cross that’s on one side of the hill and one on the other side, than getting it denied by the community for ‘‘inacurate location’', but after you appeal and explain that’s not the case, they just link it to the one that got approved before)..
There is no formal process to appeal an appeal decision, but you can post screenshots of the contribution if you want to see if the community here agrees with you that it was incorrectly rejected.
Thanks, but I think that will not change the decision either way am I right?
I really want to make a suggestion to use the upgrades towards that second appeal since top wayfarers contribute quite a lot to the map and would deserve to use those towards their submissions that they think are suitable, but got overlooked once by community and than by the employees.
It would save them some time meanwhile encourage them to keep up with submitting and reviewing more.
Very rarely, a decision will be overturned when posted here if it was clearly incorrect.
Hi @PixelMaki
I’ve moved your topic to General Discussion because the category Wayspot Appeals is for appealing rejected removal requests or to ask for reinstating removed wayspots.
Hello, some decision has been seen to be overtuned if it is an obvious wrong appeal rejecion.
See:
You can show your nomination in here and see if it is eligible or something need to be improve if you want to resubmit!
Thank you for the help!
I am not sure if adding photos to this reply would help, but I submitted two different swings that were in park area. One was located at the start of the smaller park and one is nearby the end of it, with some other children’s playground in it such as a Slide and Teeter-Tooter which also got approved, but this one swing was overlooked as it is different from one another it somehow got marked as a ‘‘Duplicate’’ which is not.
Is there already a Wayspot for the playground here? Per clarification, playgrounds should be nominated as a whole, not each individual piece. The exception would be if they clearly are in different areas and are marked as such, such as having seperate barriers or fencing around each.
Also, knowing the location would help, as we could look at it and see if each piece may be eligible or if it’s more one playground.
The appeal reviewer was defenitely right here IMO
As mentioned by @DTrain2002 playgrounds should be nominated as a whole.
I know you might see more wayspots for one playground, but those may have been wrongfully accepted
Hey! Thanks for the info!
I can agree that the parks should have a wayspot of the entire place, but such an example is a long walkway ‘‘park’’ that has one of the playground on every other segment soo they are not exactly close enough to be considered one whole playground, but rather separate sets.
You can check the location on these coordinates: 46.0318931,14.4491522
But also I can pase a picture of the things I submitted:
Thanks for posting more info about the location. I can’t say whether or not this would be considered one playground or all the pieces are separate, as they are in the same general area.
So, the appeal may not be reversed, but if it does get reversed, you will receive an email letting you know the nomination has been accepted, and the statue in Contribution Management will change, too.
I totally agree with you taht the parks should have one wayspot, but this one has quite some distance between. It’s on coordinates 46.0318931,14.4491522 and has a pathway leading to each of the playground ‘‘sets’’ which I think should be separate.
Thank you for pointing out 
I usually submit playground as one wayspot
Thanks for all the help 
Let’s hope for the best 
That indeed changes the situation.
(Did not see your last message in time)
I myself would consider these seperate, but it is up to The team to decide that.
Good luck🤗
Thank you for the opinion Fingers crossed 
If the decision won’t be overturned you should try to resubmit and take the feedback made here in consideration.
If that one would also be rejected you can link in your next appeal to this forum post. But only use links to the forum for appeals and not for nominations because that could be seen as influencing reviewers.
Is it possible to get video of the area? You can upload the video somewhere else and post the link here. I notice there are no streetview. That will make it hard for anyone to be sure that the area have multiple playground. Especially because the building looks similar . Without it, personally i would pick duplicate. But if you can proof that the playground is separated, i would probably say yes.
I am no longer close to that area, but if I can only point out that the top bar on one of the Swings is longer than the other and the picture was submitted the same day. Let me take a look what the secondary photos I submitted
Frankly it all look the same. Put urself in outsider point of view that look here for the 1st time. I cant even confirm if your foto is at that location. You can use gps tagged photo for alternative
This is something that cant be verified and it doesnt really matter.
Whats critical is evidence that the playground is in separate place. Without it, its harder to verify the location to approve the nomination.
Hey! Good suggestion, but I do not live that close to the area to get it on the video. If I put myself as outsider point of view that is really determined to figure this one out, I can confirm you are able to see the swing from the google street view
( Swing that got approved )
As an engineer I can assure you, you’re not able to swap the entire bar and get it painted back in such a short time