Often during the review, questions arise that require significant verification. For example, if a nomination is located inside a large building, I need time to study third-party resources to determine whether the point on the map is correctly positioned. Another example is when you don’t want to miss a nomination and need help with the assessment. Obviously, trying to seek help on this forum will not always result in a solution being achieved in such a short time. Why can’t the nomination reviewing be delayed, for example, for up to 24 hours, to better examine the data? What’s wrong if I rate the nomination better? If I miss the nomination, it doesn’t make sense. If I don’t have time to evaluate the nomination, it also doesn’t make sense. So what’s the difference and why not give it more time to review?
You get 20 minutes to review each nomination which is a lot of time in my view. Especially considering that the onus on providing as much information as possible is on the submitter.
My task as a reviewer should be as simple as possible to decide on their nomination.
I think 20 minutes is plenty of time. If you aren’t able to make a determination on a singular part of the review process within 20 minutes, click “I don’t know” and answer the rest of the questions.
If it’s taking you more than 20 minutes to figure out if the point of interest is actually at the location the submitter says it’s at, they haven’t done their job and that’s on them.
What if the information is insufficient or requires verification?
Then the submitter hasn’t done their job, click “I don’t know” and move onto the next step.
Just as @Glawhantojar says. As a reviewer it needs to be as easy as possible for me to make a decision. If I can’t, I can vote “I don’t know” or Skip.
It’s not my issue if the submitter hasn’t made it clear enough. They can try better next time if it is rejected.
Ideally, this might make sense. However, it’s also clear that some appraisers are unscrupulous. They can decide either that a nomination with an incorrect location is correct, or that a nomination with a correct location is incorrect. In my opinion, the indifference of reviewers at such a moment can put the nomination in a “superposition”. A nomination may be accepted or rejected simply at the discretion of unscrupulous reviewers.
I believe this problem requires further work.
This is an issue with anything that’s crowd sourced, you’ll always have people who don’t act within the guidelines provided.
Extending review times past 20 minutes certainly won’t change this, so I don’t see how it’s relevant to the topic that you created…
This is why “Using your own Judgement” is critical for review. If you certainly sure the nomination is at incorrect location, then you either fix it or reject it. If you are unsure about the location, “I don’t know” option is always fine and valid.
This is community review, mistake are doomed to happen. Most of the time it is accurate. If you think the location is being misplaced maliciously, you have the option to report for abuse.
To report, you need to have proof that the object is out of place, and to do this, you need to find the actual location, and this takes time, which is often insufficient.
You’re idealizing the community again. As much as I’d like to believe in the consciousness of the entire community, it’s actually impossible.
And again, “I don’t know” option exist.
Innocent until proven gulity in my opinion. If you are not sure if the location is inaccurate, this option exist.
Reporting isn’t limited to the 20 minute window you have to review something.
I’m not saying anything should be ultimately accepted or rejected. I’m hinting that perhaps, beyond the “Yes” and “No”, there should be a third option that doesn’t lead to either acceptance or rejection of a nomination. For example, “insufficient information,” which results in the nomination being sent for information addition/editing. Even if this is a deliberate offender, this will allow him to understand that, for example, his omission will not go unnoticed.
That’s what a rejection is for. You’re supposed to learn from the rejection that it’s either not eligible, or that you need to provide further information to help your case.
When a nomination is rejected, is there a message stating that there is insufficient information?
If the nomination is rejected, the reason it is rejected is given to the submitter. If the submitter feels that the rejection reason is inaccurate that, in and of itself, should be enough information to them that they did not provide enough information.
Anything beyond that gets into a level of hand holding that shouldn’t be necessary. If they don’t get the message, that’s on them.
If the rejection reason isn’t clear enough to educate them and they appeal, the appeals reviewers can say there was insufficient evidence to overturn the rejection. So they will be told this at some point. And if they do provide the extra evidence they left out of the nomination for the appeal, the appeal may be accepted.
Just to add to what others have already said; Wayfarers are encouraged to visit the forums in the emails, and there’s lots of unofficial but very useful groups on Facebook, Reddit and Discord for Wayfarer where they can share a rejected nomination for a wider view and assistance.
Even for the reviews that I have to do extra research on, at most, these may take 5-10 minutes for me, never the full 20 minutes.
It’s always good to have additional tools open so that you can do the research you need to as quickly as possible. Have a web search and reserve image search available, or consider adding some of the Wayfarer Tools added to your web browser to aid in your research (do a web search for Wayfarer Tools; it’s usually the first result and they do have a Reverse Image Search add-on). The title of nominations has a search link next to it that opens up a new web search. You can open up Google Maps in a new tab by clicking on the Google link on the map.
Remember, the burden of proof is on the submitter, and if they do not provide proof, you have opens to reject or choose IDK. You shouldn’t worry about how other reviewers may vote, as they may accept POIs that aren’t eligible or can’t be found, just to get another Wayspot added, and this could affect their review rating.
So, use your best judgment, don’t worry about how other reviewers may vote, and again, if the burbon of proof is not provided by the submitter, then you have options to reject/IDK/skip.
The way I look at is it that Niantic set the time limit at 20 minutes for a reason- they’re saying that should be the max time to spend on a review and they do not want us to spend more time
That means if you cant decide within 20 minutes, then reject it or hit some “I don’t know” buttons. For me, most reviews take a minute or 2, maybe up to 5. If I can’t easily find the information easily, I’m going to move on. The submitter made me work too hard, so they didn’t care enough, and why should I care more than them?