Can I get an appeal on this rejection, this is legitimately nuts to me.
Simply Google Howard house VA Brockton.
As far as low quality description, I also find that inaccurate. I posted a paragraph from the historic records.
originally known as the Howard Home for Aged Men, and it continued to serve as a self-sustaining residence for elderly men …
The supplemental image shows more of the building, including that it is building 60 at VA Brockton.
Hello,
Are you able to provide the description, as well as the supporting info? Even searching this online, it first comes up as an apartment building, which doesn’t meet criteria; some reviewers reject apartments as generic businesses, others may reject for not being permanent/distinct.
Did you take any part of the description from another source, such as a website? That’s third party, and would cause a rejection for low quality description. All descriptions should be originially written by the submitter, and not taken from another source.
All Wayfarers get 2 appeals every 20 days, so if you have an appeal available, you will be able to appeal from Contribution Management. However, I think it would be good to first see the description and supporting info, as that may need some improvements.
imo this was corrected as a generic business. it is a residence with a medical component.
oh i see @DTrain2002 has posted similar. i was also going to ask to see the description.
Ok I didn’t realize quoting from reasonable sources to describe a historic building would be an issue.
Well, let me correct you there. It is a building on the VA Brockton medical campus managed by a 3rd party with 100 percent VA oversight and VA network equipment.
Here is what the rejection criteria says about using third party sources:
Ineligible text or descriptionTitle and/or description seems copied and pasted from other sources, includes emojis, tags, or personally identifiable information such as codenames, personal names or initials, or addresses.
So, if you just took the description from the Wiki page, a submission can be rejected for low quality description.
right you can “quote” other sources, but you can’t paste their words as your words.
if you are trying to submit this as an historic building, make sure that your focus is on the building rather than the sign for the services offered there. try a photo of the whole building more like the one in the wikipedia page and put “historic” in the title.
I kinda wish there was a like button here rather than just choosing a solution because there are a few really helpful posts. Annoying to start over again on this. But thank you.
Also it’s not like I won’t be there Monday, I just hope it’s not raining so I can get a good picture without getting soaked.
being a residence for the elderly does not make it a great place to exercise, explore, or be social, so it does not meet criteria in the work performed there. i assume you are quibbling over the word “business” because it is VA. it is a place people go to to do a job, so it is still the correct rejection reason even if government run.
I don’t think that getting too focused on the exact rejection reasons is helpful though. I think the copy/paste text was the real issue, and that focusing on the history instead of the function in a new nomination will help. hope this goes through.
Historic buildings in general are not places for exercise, yet there are likely thousands of them as wayspots.
Being managed by a third party on VA property with VA oversight does not transform a historic building into a business. Especially on federal property, on a campus owned by the federal government.
oh if i made it sound like they had to meet all three, i just meant one. of course a historic building would be under “exploration”
not going to debate the generic business rejection with you. other people chose it and you said
so i explained how i saw it. wayfarer often requires working around people who have different points of view.
Historic buildings can promote exploration.
The building itself may be eligible, but the care home business doesn’t meet eligibility criteria. You took a picture of the sign for the business, which makes reviewers think you’re nominating the business. If you’re submitting it as an historic building, you should be taking a picture of the entire building and not the business sign.
I never use the solution. Instead, I use the heart on posts to give a heart, a thumb’s up, etc. I find the solution option a bit annoying, as sometimes there is additional info provided after a solution is marked. Really, it tends to be used the most by the Wayfarer team in the Wayspot Appeals forum after they have solved the issue at hand there.
Oh, and marking a post as a solutino really doesn’t do much, other than givin the poster a solution mark.
And yes, historic buildings can be great places to explore.
I would encourage you to find something on the property that tells the story of this building if you’re just submitting it as an old building. Anyone can make up a story about any place. The goal should be to help draw people to information that they can discover.
Is there an approved way to post links to online articles? Despite it’s history it hasn’t been carved into stone but there are places outside Wikipedia that have articles on this building.
Links can be added in the supporting text.
That part is better used for proof of claims: clarifying the location of the object from available maps, providing evidence supporting what has been told in the description, details related criteria and clarifications, etc.
