I’m a rural player, and I’d like to express some deep frustration with how current Wayfarer criteria make it nearly impossible for rural communities to get PokéStops.
Standards like “must be unique” or “not on private property” are biased toward cities with murals and signs everywhere. Out here, we have forest trails, local pull-offs, family memorials, and community landmarks that truly matter to us, but are routinely rejected.
On top of that, nominations are often reviewed by people with no understanding of our area—sometimes even in another country and language (e.g., I’ve received nominations in French despite not speaking it).
The system needs to recognize the local cultural context and provide flexibility for rural areas where the surroundings are mostly natural.
Please consider:
• Adjusting criteria for rural submissions.
• Giving more weight to safe pedestrian access, even on private parcels.
• Encouraging reviewers to consider regional significance, not just city-style uniqueness.
Thank you for listening. We want to play and contribute just like everyone else, but the system makes that extremely hard for us.
I would class my location as semi rural, if rural gets a change of criteria then what about semi rural, then what about those slightly above semi rural but not quite urban. This is going to get messy very quickly.
Have you read the following post that gives tips for rural players…
I see many rural areas that are way more populated than where I am.
The people reviewing should be relatively local. yes, depending on your location it may slip in to a neighbouring country especially when Upgrades get used.
As long as reviewers use the same criteria for all nominations then there should be no issues.
If you have had problems with specific nominations then post them and people will discuss if they have been correctly rejected or whether improvements could be made to improve your chances.
Sorry for hear your frustration. I have nominated Wayspots in both urban and rural areas, and I have found a good deal of eligible POIs in both. Changing the criteria and guidelines for one type of area isn’t really that fair to others, as if a rural area can have Wayspots on private residential property but an urban area can’t, that could give an advantage to rural users. Also, there are legal issues to keep in mind when it comes tp private residential property, such as trespassing, for instance, the the ToS and Players Guidelines to state to follow all appliciable laws in your area.
Keep in mind that many regions do have POIs that are of regional significance, but someone from outside that region may not see them as such. I’ve done some of the global review challenges, and I’m always surprised to see what is eligible in the different parts of the world compared to what may get accepted where I live.
Your review area may include other countries and languages, depending on where you’re located. I used to have my bonus location near where I grew up, which is close to the US/Canada border. I could get some nominations in French from time to time, since Canada has 2 national languages: English and French. Wayfarer doesn’t require that a certain language be used to make the region the nomination is being made in. As for reviewing, using a translator helps (I get a good deal of nominations from around the US in different languages, with Spanish being the 2nd most used after English).
One of the threads here that we have that been very helpful is the Tips for Rural Nominators thread. There’s a good deal of great POIs to look for in rural areas, and I’ve found many of these in both rural and urban areas. And if you have any questions about whether or not a POI may or may not be eligible, you are welcome to post in the Nomination Support thread for more assistance (trails tend to be eligible, BTW, as they may be great places to get some exercise and possibly explore).
Believe me, I’m still finding new POIs in my rural hometown to submit; I added 2 the last time I was there for a weekend, and have a few other POIs in mind for the next time I’m there. I think I’ve added most that are in the town now, and do hope to continue to add more.
I completely understand the concerns around private single-family property, but I want to point out a frustrating double standard that hurts rural players.
In urban areas, it’s completely acceptable for murals, signs, or art installations on apartment buildings (which are private residences) to become PokéStops — even if they’re clearly on private property, as long as they’re visible and safely accessible from the sidewalk.
But in rural areas, where we have larger parcels and no sidewalks, reviewers often reject similar or even more accessible landmarks like family memorials, installations at the front of property lines, or unique art that’s plainly viewable from a public road or pull-off. These don’t violate the base Wayfarer criteria — they’re only denied due to interpretations and extra restrictions applied inconsistently by reviewers.
All I’m asking is for equal treatment: If something is publicly viewable and safely accessible without needing to step on private land — just like urban murals — it should be judged fairly, not shut down just because it’s rural.
Rural players deserve a chance to enrich their communities too.
Thanks — I hear you and I’m definitely trying to follow the same standards in both rural and urban areas. I’m not asking for different rules for rural, just fair and consistent application of the existing ones.
Urban areas often get murals or art on apartment buildings accepted — which are still private residential property — as long as they’re viewable from public space. But if rural players have something creative or meaningful on the edge of their property, like a memorial, sculpture, or post-mounted sign that’s clearly visible and accessible from a public roadside or pull-off, we’re often denied.
It’s frustrating because it doesn’t break any of the core Wayfarer guidelines — just the added assumptions made by reviewers. If it’s visible from a public place and doesn’t require stepping onto the property, it should meet the same criteria as urban examples.
And yes — I’m also close to the Canadian border, so I get nominations in French too. But that’s part of the issue: language options should exist for reviewing, especially near bilingual borders. It’d be nice if Wayfarer let you filter nominations by language or at least prioritize your own.
Thanks for the suggestion on the rural tips thread — I’ll check that out. But I still hope we’ll see Niantic or Scopely improve the system to give rural communities a fairer shot at contributing meaningful Wayspots.
Thanks — I appreciate the tips and I’ve definitely seen that post. I understand the rules are intended to be the same everywhere, but the practical effect is that rural players are limited to only a few spots — and only if we’re willing to drive into a town center.
The problem is: I don’t live or socialize in the town center. I walk and bike in the areas around my home — and so do dozens of others in the area. We have popular local running and biking groups that use these same routes daily. But under current reviewer interpretations, those places can’t qualify, even if something like a memorial, pull-off sign, or trail marker fully meets the criteria and is accessible from public space.
Urban players get to nominate art or signage they pass on their walk to work or their commute. For us, it’s a 15-minute drive just to find something a reviewer might accept. That’s the heart of the issue — it’s not about “changing the criteria,” it’s about interpreting them with awareness of how different environments function.
Would love to see more discussion about how to help nominations near well-traveled rural roads get a fairer look — and maybe how reviewers can be encouraged to weigh actual accessibility and significance over assumptions about property types.
I also want to clarify that I’m not necessarily looking for help on specific nominations here. I’ve actually been using AI tools to better understand the criteria, evaluate possible POIs, and even get insight into why certain things may be rejected. That’s helped a lot — but what I’m seeing reflected back over and over again are the same common frustrations many rural players have voiced already across this forum and others.
I’m adding my voice not as someone who’s just upset over a few rejections, but as someone who’s done the research, put in the time, and sees that there are meaningful, safe, and reasonable changes Niantic could make to better support rural communities. I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss those concerns just because they’re complicated.
I’m not here to complain — I’m here because I believe that enough people speaking up with thoughtful, experience-based feedback might help move things forward. So this is me, doing just that.
When I mentioned AI tools, I was referring to things like ChatGPT — tools that can help organize information, summarize guidelines, or even help brainstorm ways to phrase nominations more clearly. I’ve used it to understand the Wayfarer criteria better and to look for patterns in why certain nominations might be rejected (like being too close to private residential property or not having safe pedestrian access).
It doesn’t make decisions for me — I still do all the research myself and explore my local area to find real-world points of interest that meet the guidelines. I’ve just found it helpful for things like proofreading descriptions, translating tricky language, and clarifying what might qualify in a rural context.
Just trying to be thoughtful and use every resource I can to improve both the quality of my submissions and how I contribute to the system!
TY for explaining how you are using AI. I rejected so many ChatGPT descriptions that were bad - usually for making a game reference in the description, but sometimes just wrong - and reported so many fake AI photos that the statement made me nervous.
Absolutely agree — these tools like ChatGPT are only as good as the thought and care put into using them. They can help make your writing clearer and more concise, but they won’t magically fix vague wording or make sure you meet all the criteria. If you don’t ask the right questions or check your post against the actual rules, the tool can’t do that for you.
Regarding the naming issue: this is exactly why a more community-based review approach makes sense over rigid enforcement. Human interpretation is flawed — I was initially rejecting nominations for just mentioning the game too, but after comparing notes with other local reviewers, it became clear that not everyone sees that as a violation. And based on my research, the base rules don’t explicitly ban mentioning the game — it’s more about whether it’s influencing the viewer unfairly, which is a gray area.
On the legal side, the Reddit post you shared about the trespassing lawsuit is a great summary. But it doesn’t mean nothing is allowed near private property — rather, Niantic made some specific pledges to address complaints and reduce conflict:
They’ll make “commercially reasonable efforts” to resolve complaints and respond within 15 days.
Single-family residential property owners can request removal of a stop or gym if it’s within 40 meters (~131 feet) of their home. That’s not an automatic rejection — it just means the owner has the right to request removal later.
That does not mean you can’t nominate interesting things near private homes. If something is:
Not physically on private residential property, and
Clearly accessible and visible from public space (like a sidewalk),
And does not encourage trespassing,
— then it can still be eligible.
But if it’s on someone’s yard, driveway, or porch — even if it’s visible — it’s not eligible.
Niantic also maintains a complaint database to help avoid repeated issues, shows warnings for large in-person raids, and works with reviewers and mapping tools to respect things like park hours.
And circling back to the value of local context — one of the biggest challenges is that reviewers from far away, especially in densely packed urban areas, don’t always understand what residential spacing looks like in rural or suburban neighborhoods. When houses aren’t on top of each other, something that’s perfectly safe and clearly accessible can still be misjudged as “residential.” That’s why local knowledge matters — and why over-relying on distant reviewers or generic interpretations can hurt otherwise good submissions.
Most players that have used the “there are nothing to nominate in my area” quote and then passed the area they are from have received many suggestions and advice on how to present them.
@cyndiepooh is one example that I have seen give fantastic advice regards rural nominations.
You may want to give that a try?
I have only ever seen 1 occasion where the answer was “sorry, there really isn’t anything”.
Just to clarify — I’m absolutely not saying there’s nothing in my area to nominate. I know there are potential POIs, and many players (myself included) have seen and appreciated great advice from folks like @cyndiepooh on how to present rural nominations more effectively.
My point is more about the disconnect between the intended spirit of a community-based game and the reality for those in rural or semi-rural areas. What’s being found and submitted in my area is often concentrated in the town center, which can be 10+ minutes away by car. So even though there are eligible locations, many players — especially those without reliable transportation — are left feeling excluded from something that’s supposed to be local and walkable.
It’s frustrating when urban players can literally walk outside and engage with dozens of stops, while others have to leave their own neighborhood entirely just to participate in a meaningful way. That imbalance doesn’t make rural areas empty — it highlights how criteria and accessibility intersect differently depending on where you live.
Honestly, I’d be willing to bet that if you walked — or even rode a bike to cover more ground — you still wouldn’t find much near many rural players beyond some interesting gardens, lawn ornaments, or just more rocks and trees. It’s not about a lack of effort — it’s about different surroundings.
So again, I’m not claiming my area has nothing. I’m just agreeing with others who’ve said it feels a little disheartening that in order to engage with a community-based experience, you’re often required to leave your own.
From the official Wayfarer help text (paraphrased):
Don’t submit descriptions that:
Include names/initials of unrelated individuals
Include emojis, emoticons, or irrelevant game references
Include HTML, URLs, or code
Must comply with the Terms of Service
The key word here is: irrelevant.
Saying “this would be a great addition to Pokémon GO” or “this would make a good PokéStop” is not automatically irrelevant, especially if it’s brief and contextually appropriate in the supporting info, not the title or description.
What You (and ChatGPT) Got Right
You correctly noticed that:
The rules do not say “don’t mention the game at all.”
The intent is to avoid overly game-focused nominations that lack cultural, historical, or local significance.
A quick mention like “this would be a good PokéStop” in the supporting info isn’t a violation — it’s a player explaining how it fits into the game context. That alone should not be the sole reason for rejection.
Why Rejections Still Happen
Some reviewers interpret any mention of Pokémon GO or PokéStops as trying to “influence reviewers,” which is discouraged. But the guidelines don’t clearly prohibit mentions — they discourage using game relevance as the only justification for approval.
So:
“This is a great place to socialize and play Pokémon GO” → might feel borderline or too game-centered.
“This is a unique trail marker at a major hiking junction. It would also make a great PokéStop for local players.” → fine, because the primary reason is solid.
What to Do About It
If you’re being rejected for simply mentioning Pokémon GO in a supporting statement, you’re likely facing misinformed or overly strict reviewers. Here’s how to handle it:
Keep titles and descriptions free of all game references — that’s clear.
In supporting info, keep it brief and secondary to your actual justification.
Report abuse if you’re seeing consistent improper rejections (though unfortunately, that’s a slow fix).
Bottom Line
You didn’t miss anything — and neither did ChatGPT. The rules don’t ban mentioning Pokémon or PokéStops entirely. They just caution against using that as your sole justification or placing those references in official description fields. It’s a common misunderstanding in the review community — and you’re absolutely right to call it out.
. It’s not about a lack of effort — it’s about different surroundings.
What the Guidelines Actually Say
Bottom Line