I know it’s a high bar to get a bench accepted, but I thought this one is interesting enough to put a tick the exploration box. In retrospect, I should have mentioned the ironwork GWR logo supports, which is what distinguishes the bench, in the description rather than the supporting information. Is there anything else I ought to add or change on resubmission?
Based on the primary image, I am struggling to see how this is a suitable nomination. Any chance you can focus on the logo or any plaques on the bench?
1 Like
When I visited this, I was fixated on capturing the whole bench in the main image, but just before your response I was thinking that I could just take the main photo of a side view of the support so that the ironwork logo is more clear.
1 Like
In some instances, taking a photo of the whole bench would be suitable. But it really needs to stand out.
The image below is from one of my photo nomination. The original nomination focused on the plaque, this was just updated to show the new plaque.
Sometimes, the focus of the submission needs to be just the subject plus a small area around it along with a supplimentary image of the whole bench may be enough.
However, there’s nothing stopping you from appealing the nomination and seeing if it can be overturned. I’m being a little picky.
2 Likes
Thank you for your replies.
I am a rookie at this game and so I’d like to think I’d exhausted any potential improvements before resorting to an appeal.
1 Like
Here’s the thing… I may be over picky over why I would reject and this could be a perfectly acceptable nomination. If you appeal it via the appeal button and it gets rejected on review, you may want to resubmit it after that.
1 Like
Yes, if you have an appeal available, you can use its extra text to play up how historic it is. At first look it’s a common indistinct bench, but actually it has unique history. People can sit on it and imagine sitting on it 100 years ago waiting for a train to London. Seems like something one might explore.
1 Like
I would appeal it. If the appeal gets rejected, appeal it on here in the respective group.
2 Likes
I found some more information online, so thought I would transfer more information from supporting information to the description and bulk out the resubmission with not one but three website links (two local heritage ones bigging up the location and the other demonstrating that the design is genuine):
e
Another decision to reject, but the fact that it went straight from in queue to rejection, immediately after going in voting, as if the additional information meant nothing to one reviewer giving it a not distinct thumbs down and that was that.
I would still appeal it. Explain the history as much as you can and include the links in the Appeal and hopefully the rejection will be overturned.
2 Likes
Albert Park Abingdon. Such a challenge.
Not distinct is basically saying it is a bench. But you have provided much information about it explaining why THIS bench is different.
Least of which why is a GWR bench in the middle of the park 
and you explain this.
I think the first one has a better main photo. I would go again. I do not think you have to focus on the GWR logo. Use the photos from the first one with the text of the second one and as everyone says - appeal if it fails. And explain in the appeal why it is a good place to explore… There are more than enough great reasons to pass. GWR bench, remaining cast iron fixtures in Abingdon, apart from ticket stubs last remaining piece of station infrastructure from Steventon and one of the very very very few GWR pieces in abingdon.
I get what P1dg3ySlayer is saying but from a local perspective, a heritage perspective that main photo is good. It is the whole bench not the logo as the whole bench is a GWR bench.
This is the 8 foot (2.4m) 6 person station bench. You can add that if you want. Also for supporting information include this link - look near bottom it has a photo link (pop up link is - A large GWR Bench) of your bench The Abingdon branch
PS. Be aware that Steventon Parish Council want it. Christs Hospital still own Albert Park and will sell as long as all costs are covered. Parish Council is putting up 500 quid towards it.
Speaking of which. Christ Hospital are very much open to Abingdon Council taking over the runnning of the Park. As a charity their focus is on providing for the disadvantaged not running the park, while greatly used and loved by the Abingdon community, is less money for their primary purpose. Be interesting to watch.
Good luck @Liverlouike15
1 Like
Sorry for the belated reply. I have now come out of hibernation with a dozen nominations, one of which being a resubmission of this one, with the original photo as you suggested and including the dimensions you quoted. I already had a link to the photo of the bench in the supplemental information section.
Thank you for the additional information about the short term objectives of the parish council and the long term aims of Christ’s Hospital charity.
2 Likes
It has updated now:
I did reference it being installed nearly 40 years ago and used the word “permanent” twice. I’ll have to appeal once my cool-off ends.
Its not rejected because temporary. At this moment niantic is tweaking rejection reason. But they mess up with this one.
When reviewer pick not distinct, they inevitable click this clause which will return with temprary thing.
All my jogging marker also got rejected as temporary which i believe more likely because of its distinctness.
Would they then not select this reason instead though?
That one appears to be how “Generic Business” is displaying now. With the “Rejections Plus” tool, it looks like this:
I am just saying temporary and not distinct is now under same rejection clause. When reviewer pick “not distinct” , submitter will receive that temporary thing. I think it used to say “not distinct” but niantic remove it and make people more confused.
2 Likes
I wonder whether it is worth resubmitting again, if I can find something additional or different to say about this nomination, because of the review challenge it might be looked at by some more sympathetic reviewers and even if not should be decided either way before my appeal cool-off ends.
Any advice from fellow explorers greatly appreciated.
1 Like