I made this nomination thinking that it would be a really great point of interest, but obviously something wasn’t right. I have had over 40 successful nominations previously. Can I get some feedback on potential reasons why this nomination was rejected. Please note: The nomination and rejection images supplied are in the reverse order, from bottom to top.
Thankyou in advance.
Is this located on the property of either a school (for students under 18), or a single family house? Those locations are strictly prohibited.
OK. I think that I have found out the problem. When nominating the Waypoint, I may have been too close to the property next door, and it has been set that as being that property in my nomination, instead of the property next to it, which I believe is an Apex Club House (community organisation). I typed in Google Maps the address in the nomination, which is in fact a family house. I will resubmit the nomination from further away from that property.
I think that I’m going to have a problem. The block on the corner doesn’t actually seem to have a specific address, and the road running parallel to the railway line isn’t even shown on Google Maps as having a name. The road can be seen in the image, but not on the actual map itself. See attached images.
The reason for the rejection is on your contribution, not in the email. Go to https://wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/new/nominations and we can work from there. From the email, I predict that this will say it was by the “automated process” which means a human hasn’t looked at this yet.
Don’t worry about the generated street address. The pin in your email does not put it on the residential property.
I don’t think that the automated process rejects on location anyway, based on some ineligible locations I have seen go live, but we don’t know exactly how it works, so maybe. But I think that the more likely reason is that it did not recognize a painted tree trunk as something that might be eligible. This may require using an appeal to get a human to review it. We get 2 appeals, each on a 15 day counter before we can use them again.
I have no idea how this will do in review. It is not something I have seen before.
When I get this rejection, I usually try a new submission, making the point of interest as clear (and as glamorous) as I can. Your photo is nice, so I don’t really have any suggestions on that front.
I think you have described the point of interest well, and explained why it is a point of interest with community significance. The only suggestion I could make is adding a link explaining/confirming this initiative in the supporting section.
The other option is an appeal. That will ensure a human reviews the nomination. You could add links about the initiative in your appeal statement. I have no idea how they will see this.
I agree with @cyndiepooh.
One thing to note: is the text under Mental Health Blue Tree the description, or the supplemental info? It’s not clear from the screenshot, since neither field is required. If this is the description you submitted, I wonder if the term s****** had something to do with the AI rejection (sorry, I can’t write it in the forum as it’s not allowed).
If you do appeal this, I suggest including a link that explains the blue tree initiative. If you resubmit, I suggest a short description, saving the majority of the details for the supplemental info section – and include a link there too. I would omit the S word in the description and supplemental info in case it triggers an automatic denial.
I wasn’t assuming anything to do with the map - I was really asking the question. Given the size of the building and the lack of paved walkways, it looks like it might be a picture of someone’s home.
I did wonder about that word when I was writing it. I actually stopped and thought about it, but decided to write it as it felt relevant to the initiative. I might just change the wording in my next submission, leaving that word out.
The description and supplemental info seemed to carry on after each other in the rejection e-mail, but were separate in the nomination.
I’ll add a link in my next nomination as supporting info for the nomination (although I have never had to do that previously, but it will back up my claims about the initiative).
Thank you.
