Hi! Lately I’ve been seeing a lot of residential maps as wayspot submissions in Finland. I’d like to get some input and clarification on how the Wayfarer community think these should be reviewed. Here are a few examples of what I’m talking about:
How should RESIDENTIAL area maps such as these be reviewed? In Finland, I’d argue that about 85% of row-house and block of flats residential areas have these maps that showcase each house co-operative’s area. Their purpose is most often to aid with emergency services (the fire deparment, ambulance and the police can more accurately locate the building in question with these maps) and they are also used by people (such as delivery drivers) visiting the area, especially for the first time. I’ve been personally reviewing these as generic (since they’re so common place) and I personally do not think they meet the eligibility criteria (the only argument would be “a great place to explore” but even then I’d argue that they are not places one would revisit for exploration purposes) but to my surprise, I’ve seen some of these residential area maps be accepted as Wayspots through reviewing. By that I mean that when conducting reviews, I’ve seen a few of these maps as nearby Wayspots to the ones I’m reviewing, but I have not bumped into these as accepted Wayspots in my local area and thus cannot mark for them for removal if the community does not find these eligible. Since a few of these have been accepted, I’ve started seeing supporting information reference maps such as these having been accepted (not good supporting info imo, if a wayspot is falsely accepted, that doesn’t mean more of them should be..). So, how should maps such as these (depicting solely residential areas and showcasing which buildings belong to each housing co-operative) be reviewed?
