The other day I saw a turtle statue in the middle of the street and I thought It would be a easy POI, but eMiLy took it down. What can I do to avoid this? It’s not the first time It happens and I want to understand what is wrong with my photos!
This is the location, you can clearly see it on streetview: Google Maps
You cant evade emily. All nomination goes though her. If you sure your nomination is eligible you can appeal or resubmit. I am not familiar with the area but is is single family private residential property behind it? If its SFPRP, then its ineligible. Anyway people usually question permanency of small object like this. Its also possible that emily think someone put turtle statue to submit wayspot.
It’s not part of a SFPRP. The statue is placed in the sidewalk. Maybe if it was on the stairs you can think it’s SFPRP, but it’s not. By the way, does eMiLy analyze if it’s SFPRP?
Noone know how emily works because it will be abused.
But the garden seems to be under SFPRP
If this is not correct you can try getting boundry map on this area.
It’s not on the sidewalk (that space would be considered by most people to be part of the property behind it) and it is a ridiculously easy object to put somewhere, photograph, then remove, so even if it is /was/ on the sidewalk it would be rejected as temporary.
If it genuinely is public space, you could gather evidence and submit an appeal, just not for this object since it isn’t going to be accepted due to what it is.
Ok. I’ve done some research and found in the Spanish cadastral map that, as I’ve been saying, this is a public area and does not belong to private property. I’m attaching proof.
I find it ridiculous that I have to be digging up evidence for something that should be so straightforward to approve. Honestly, with the kind of standards I’m seeing in this forum, do you really think it’s reasonable for someone reviewing nominations to go check the Spanish cadastre to confirm if it’s public land? That seems way too much. Then you see other nominations, like an ordinary water fountain or just a graffiti, getting accepted without a second thought.
Cadastral map: Sede Electrónica del Catastro - Fondo mapa de España
No, that is not reasonable and reviewers won’t do that. They will just evaluate the space from their own knowledge (reviewers will tend to be from the local-ish area) and decide if they think this is SFPRP.
If you see graffiti in the game, you should report it. Sometimes things slip through the review process that shouldn’t be there. Murals are not the same as graffiti.
Water fountains can be eligible. It depends on the fountain. Some fountains are worthy of exploration.
This is wrong assumption. The onus is on submitter to present enough evidence to support their nomination. Reviewer dont have time to google all these information. Its your duty to present them in supporting information. Not doing so will lower your chance of acceptance. Its your own loss. If the submitter dont even willing to spend time to back up his nomination, why would you expect reviewer to do it? Imagine if you need dozens reviewer (i dont know how much needed) to get approval. Which one is more efficient to gather information? One local people that submit the nomination? Or dozens not so local people that may not know the area and kept reviewing nomination without evidence.
Water fountain is usually eligible, but its not acceptable if its in SFPRP as well.
Grafitti is considered vandalism that can be reported for removal.
If you see ineligible wayspot , they dont set precedent. Some might be imported or incorrectly accepted. Its just stay on borrowed time until someone report them.
That’s helpful.
It’s not your fellow wayfinders reviewing that set a standard, these come from Wayfarer. And as reviewers we can’t just ignore those guidelines. There are areas where as reviewers we need to make judgement calls.
We learn from doing reviews what a submission looks like to someone not deeply familiar with that location. I learnt from reviewing that a lot of assumptions I had made with crafting my submissions were not the best. I learnt how to make life easier for the person reviewing by anticipating the questions and doubts they might have.
The feedback you are getting here feels frustrating. People are doing the task of pointing out the weaknesses, which feels harsh and uncomfortable, but are challenging so that you have a chance to learn this way, rather than get a series of rejections.
You have a choice to make with this nomination to appeal or resubmit.
You do now have a clear idea about the evidence you need to appeal that cadastre map will be vital.
If you resubmit you can tackle the question of being on private property in the supplementary. Maybe see if you can make the object standout more, crop more tightly on the object, but otherwise photos are good. Maybe alter your description to say why this something worth looking at?
You need to address if this is a unique object and not just something from a garden centre. We don’t know what Emily picks up on so making a stronger nomination all round will help.
This is something I would reject as being something the homeowner put out in front of their home. There is a similar discussion going on around items like this on another recent topic.
Even if you could prove this is not SFPRP, is it just a cute decoration, or art?
