Submission of bronze sculpture rejected

Nomination Support
1
  • Wayspot Title:

Solitude, Linthwaite House

  • Location (lat/lon):

54.352434,-2.913405

  • Screenshot of the Rejection Email (do not include your personal information):

IMG_3099
IMG_30991206Ă—1836 138 KB

  • Additional Information (if any)

Hello I think your ML needs retraining to understand the difference between a naked person and a sculpture.

Since visiting this location I have submitted approx 25 wayspots using the same network. Of those this is the only one to be rejected outright.

The submission is a stylised bronze sculpture of a naked woman. The picture was not taken using anything different to the other 24. I even included evidence of the artwork’s creator in my supporting as taken from the hotel’s book of art.

Am I to take from this that sculptures of naked humans are not eligible?

Any help you can give me here would be appreciated.

4 Likes
2

IMG_3098
IMG_30981070Ă—1650 139 KB

1 Like
3

DipticExportSaveLocation
DipticExportSaveLocation1920Ă—1920 513 KB

2 Likes
4

It doesn’t look like you’ve appealed this within wayfarer itself yet?

5

Hi,
I am moving this to Nomination Support as the appeals area is very specific.

1 Like
6

On WDD, you mentioned that these were immediately rejected upon submission if I understood correctly. How long between the acknowledgement email and the rejection? This might be something else besides the ML model. Especially with that rejection reason.

1 Like
7

There was no acknowledgment email, just the rejection shown here, hence why I called it an immediate rejection.

1 Like
8

IMG_3111
IMG_31111175Ă—680 109 KB

This morning I used a new photo from the rear and got it into queue.

I would still like to know For Science whether it is the nakedness ( can’t type n u d e ) that the system doesn’t like

1 Like
9

I actually like the new photo a lot more. It seems to me it encapsulates the concept of solitude more.

5 Likes
10

True

1 Like
11

I’m going to make a wild guess that the rejection could indeed be based on human nakedness. Maybe it’s not a judgement of nakedness but sensitivity to concerns FOR younger players, just like school spots are ineligible. That being said, I agree it appeal is the right course. It’s been accepted already in its own community.

12

Sorry I should share the resolution on this - the resubmission with the rear view was pushed into Niantic Review, and was then approved after four days.

It would still be nice for some guidance on artworks like this. I’m not sold on the idea younger players shouldn’t be seeing naked statues though.

5 Likes
13

When I attended Paris Go Fest, we went to the Louvre. If young people aren’t supposed to see naked statues, the Louvre needs to be 18+ :rofl: thankfully children ARE allowed, and can enjoy all the beautiful artwork

3 Likes
14

Think you have a double negitive there. I will take it you are against younger players seeing items such as this.

The most likely reason they would see this is if they are at the statue in real life so if their parants are OK with them seeing it in real life then I see no problem with them seeing it in game.

I understand that different countries have different opinions on such art and therefore see the 2nd image (the one that was accepted) being a great compromise (and in this case a better image).

15

No, the statement reads that @tomwe thinks there is no problem with children seeing artwork that is naked.

1 Like
16

This is starting to sound well wrong. :expressionless_face:

Statues, classical artwork, gallery exhibits.

I do not condone children being exposed to sexualised artwork.

1 Like
17

lol glad i tagged you. i was trying to figure out how to say this:

but couldn’t. this is perfect. the statue above is not something i would have a problem with children seeing. the graphic renderings often seen in graffiti are. and many things are in between.

2 Likes