Picnic benches/areas are listed as “great places to socialise” and are suggested as submissions for rural locations on the Niantic forums.
I have submitted 4 alongside one of my towns official trail walks [the Riverside walk] these multiple picnic spots are all on the trail.
The stopping points with seating bridge the gaps between the trail marker signs and are each anchor points for different key scenic views alongside and each faces the river Arun.
Each picnic area has a hard standing to mark out a designated place for multiple people to congregate which differentiates them from generic benches.
These have all been rejected for either “incorrect location” or “non permanent” which are both false statements as these are valid points along one of the towns trail walls.
I don’t have the option to appeal via contribution management. Therefore, Please could these be reconsidered.
Wayspot Title(s):
Picnic bench on the trail 1 - Riverside walk
Picnic bench on the trail 2 - Riverside walk
Picnic bench on the trail 3 - Riverside walk
Picnic bench on the trail 4 - Riverside walk
Location (lat/lon): nr (51.0590290, -0.3497171)
City: Horsham
Country: England, UK
Screenshot of the Rejection Email (do not include your personal information):
Picnic benches/areas are listed as “great places to socialise” and are suggested as submissions on the Niantic forums.
The appeal for this picnic bench has been rejected for being non permanent or distinct which is false as it is an anchor point on 1. A public recreation ground and 2. is distinct seating specifically facing a football pitch (which is an approved stop). This pitch itself hosts many of the towns league teams and matches (see additional info)
Please could this be reconsidered.
Wayspot Title: Picnic bench - facing the football pitch
Location (lat/lon): nr (51.0589888, -0.3429513)
City: Horsham
Country: England, UK
Screenshot of the Rejection Email (do not include your personal information):
Picnic areas are often incorrectly rejected and I’ve had to bring rejected appeals to the forum in the past to have them overturned.
Can you share your nominations with us so we can suggest any improvements before you get to to appeal stage? Your appeals refresh every 2 weeks so if you wait, you’ll be able to appeal more soon, but one thing I noticed immediately is you haven’t given the Picnic areas unique names - just numbers, so that would be an improvement I can see right away which may also help combat the “not distinct” rejections you’re getting?
Here are 2 picnic spaces I got approved recently that sounds similar to yours ie hardstanding and by water, in case it helps to see they can get accepted sometimes.
Do you realize your coordinate doesnt show the object? I suggest you to give more evidence to show reviewer that the object is really on that location. No street view also doesnt help here.
I gave a generic coordinate as my post was about 4 submissions. I can list all 4 separately if that’s helpful? But as it’s a trail walk and not possible via street view or arial maps due to tree canopy. The photos - both of the submission and the surrounding area show the location and its surroundings.
I could try using the app you suggested, but I feel like the submission would still fall foul of the other reasons above. Have you had success with picnic benches using this method?
Thank you for your helpful comment and suggestion. I will try putting them on here in future for suggestions prior to submitting.
What would you suggest for a naming convention? Some of them are by specific trees- ones by a willow, another a pine. Could that help make them more distinctive?
I think anything specific to the area its in, the trees could work, or the direction or view like I used for mine. I think when reviewers see things being numbered, it almost makes them think its less distinctive straight away, where a “real name” helps. That’s just my opinion I quite like the idea of something like Willow Tree Picnic Bench
Oh I should also note that usually pictures have location data built into them when taken on mobile and that is sufficient - no need for apps
Had a look around the area and wow what a cool space, and I think there’s lots of other things to submit including the potential for maybe 4 things over at Thorpe Way? I would also be inclined to try some park entrances even if they dont have signs, and if there are some nice pictures to be taken of footbridges at entrances or on walking routes then those are possible submissions too?
I might have missed something here but I don’t see the locations of the 4 benches listed.
Have you considered whether this it is 4 distinctive picnic location or 1 “Picnic Area”.
I have seen other posts here that definitely suggest that individual picnic benches have an harder time than when there are several. Several picnic benches together shouts “Social”, individual can be seen as “somewhere to have a break” (wrongly or rightly).
I am going to merge this into the other wayspots around this area.
Sorry tgat in merging it is slightly confused.
I have to agree that this is not a picnic table - I would always look to call something for picnics a table as it is that part of the feature tgat makes it in my view a place to sit eat and socialise on a different level to that of a bench.
Keep in mind that the category is “not permanent/distinct” so reviewers declining it are not necessarily taking issue with how permanent it is, but that it is not distinct. Unfortunately the interface doesn’t really forefront that part of it especially in the rejection email.
To answer this specific question, I would put the trail name in the submission. Like [Trail Name] Bench #1 or [Trail Name] Picnic Area #4, whatever naming convention you go with. I would say that calling it a picnic area when it’s a bench could be interpreted as misleading to reviewers, you can certainly eat at a bench but can’t always easily picnic at one. Picnic areas can contain benches but are generally associated with tables, grills, shelters, etc. I personally wouldn’t reject it solely for that, but if I called it a picnic area in one of my submissions I would expect it to get declined.
Personally I don’t love the idea of nominating plain solo benches and picnic tables but being along a distinct trail is more convincing, especially if the trail doesn’t have other typical distinguishing features along it like mile markers or nature signs. In that case it functions similar to those markers; they are set objects along a trail that can be a landmark for the trail users.
Unfortunately a lot of reviewers might still skip it because unnamed solo benches and tables can easy be interpreted as “not distinct”.
As I can’t do anything with it now (eg Edit), do I need to wait for an appeal button to appear and try explaining these points in the text field I’m given, or do you think it would be better to resubmit a new stop with a better naming convention and better photos- I’m not sure what the best process is to try and get them reviewed.
I understand your point about solo benches- I believe some others I submitted in the area could flag as this, despite them also being used as picnic areas they don’t have a hard standing and so I’d understand them being rejected a little better, but the 4 I submitted all have a huge concrete hard standing around them.
I guess the only reason why they’re not the table kind of benches is the fact they’re on key “viewing/photo points” of the river itself and having your back to a potential steep drop into water would be unsafe.
What makes these 4 unique is that the rest of the walk (unless it’s also by picturesque points of the river) doesn’t have any benches along it, so it’s not like there’s regularly one every 100yards along the 13mile trail.
Very frustrating as a local trying to explain to strangers how things work.
Do you realize that your submission is prone to abuse? Without real evidence about its location, you can literally put anything under tree canopy. Thats why location evidence is critical in order to avoid this location rejection.
Its just advise and nothing is guaranteed. You can use other evidence that you deemed sufficient. Put yourself in reviewer shoes. Can you locate the object using the information in your nomination? If you yourself have difficulty, its probably gonna get mismatch location rejection again.
Thank you! Our council is very invested in the trails and park furniture round here.
The suggestions you made, yes, there is a lovely iron footbridge over the river, and I could do the park entrance gate also. The only reason why I’ve hesitated before to submit them is due to lack of signage and I wasn’t sure how to explain them as unique or significant?
All of the trail markers are in.
There’s also two community orchards, but again, no signage (yet).
I see your point but in the “surrounding area” photo when making the submissions I’ve zoomed out enough so you can see the trail marker posts (where possible) which can easily be cross referenced and validate the submission as these are already stops in game. There is a footpath linking all of this up which is on the map also and is visible in the submission photos.
fwiw, I always try a resubmit before I use an appeal, since I have way more nominations than appeals to use. Especially given that you have had a lot of advice on how to improve the nominations, I would encourage a resubmit of the ones the community think are eligible first. You can still appeal later if they are rejected again.
I quite like the idea of something like Willow Tree Picnic Bench 
