Just to clarify one point:
The nominations involved in my case were not random objects, but part of an official neighbourhood art project with explicit municipal approval. Some were even accepted as valid Wayspots afterwards.
Because of that, it’s still unclear to me how these could be judged as ‘low quality’ or ‘abuse.’
To avoid misunderstandings, I’ve requested a GDPR transparency review so Niantic can clarify how these labels were applied.
Not trying to reopen the discussion — just providing the missing context.
It is important to not spread misinformation. There is a difference between acceptance and validity.
An accepted wayspot is not to be seen as a reflection of valid wayspots we have the wayfarer criteria for that: Niantic Wayfarer
Unfortunately it happens that wayspots get accepted while not meeting the criteria.
Sufficient feedback has been provided in a previous thread about why these are considered to be low quality: Deeply Affected by False Accusations – Seeking Understanding
Feel free to disagree of course! But that thread had many community members and Niantic staff weigh in, which provides the right context.