Came by this thread a while ago and have been checking back here every so often since I’m also coincidentally around this same area.
I just recently returned to POGO thanks to some friends and so I’ve also been trying to look for spots nearby that could potentially become a waypoint/pokestop.
Noticed the pool appearing recently as a new waypoint/pokestop and that the bridge turned into a Gym and wondered if it was you lol. Congrats on getting it approved and thanks for contributing to the area. ^^
On another note, I just back read a bit since it’s been a while and see that a suggested spot to check out was the courts here
I might go check it out sometime this week and see if its accessible. Despite it looking like there’s a divider between the pair of courts (2 courts looked fenced while the other 2 appear unfenced) this would be considered one submission if eligible right? Don’t really have much experience with nominating waypoints so though I’d take this opportunity to double check.
There’s a fence separating those 2 sets of courts and 2 different walkways leading to each set. I would submit those as 2 different wayspots. Of course, that doesn’t mean both would meet the rules for inclusion in PGO.
I would treat these as a single wayspot even though there is a separator.
There is no consensus as how to treat separate identical sports features like this. When a 5-a-side is next to a full-size football field, it is fairly well agreed that is two separate wayspots. When two football fields are next to each other, most people agree these are one wayspot. The existence of a small fence between those two fields would change the opinion of some people but not everyone.
You could try, but be prepared for rejection as duplicate. For best use in Pokemon Go, check the S2 cell boundaries as you have flexibility for where to put the wayspots and could easily have a chance at landing in separate cells.
Please don’t write that there is no concensus on how to treat fields likes this and then write that “most people agree that these are one wayspot.” I would remind you that this is in Texas. Most American Wayfinders view individual sport fields as individual wayspots. This is a regional difference based on the culture around sports in the US, and especially Texas where American football is almost on the level of a religion.
Additionally, seeing each set of fenced tennis courts as an individual wayspot is based on direct advice from a former Wayfarer employee. While that was said prior to the criteria “refresh”, there has been no guidance to refute that advice, so it stands as relevant guideline to many. (It’s on the old forum, maybe Cyndie will wander by and drop the link.)
I remember the thread that discussed this issue, a few months back. There was no overall consensus, except with spaces for different sports. There is no conflict in what I said.
Edit: I don’t thinks sports fields come under the category of “things that are special and should be treated differently in country A compared to other countries”. Such things do exist (UK postboxes), but I have never before heard anyone suggest this about sports facilities.
There’s no definitive list of what things are culturally different. But i know as someone who has submitted hundreds of sport courts in the US and reviewed thousands how we think about them. I’ve also had many conversations with Wayfinders in different countries to understand the general feeling of how things are reviewed. Brits 100% have a different view towards sport courts than American Wayfinders. There is nothing wrong with that. We dont have to all be universal in how we apply our best judgment.
But since my experience is primarily with American submissions, i try really hard not to give advice on British nominations, espeically when it will go against local sentiment. For example, I do not weigh in on PROW discussions even though those just seem like standard walking trails to me. I’ve learned that culturally, PROWs are different from trails, so i let those who have experience with them give the advice.
I think this has been lost to time. here is the last time i tried to find it:
Here is where Gendgi quoted it on the old forum
In a since-deleted post, @NianticCasey-ING offered guidance regarding tennis courts at a park. There were maybe 5 or 6 separate enclosures that were maybe 20-50 meters apart, and each enclosure had 2 or 3 tennis courts. The advice offered was that each fenced in enclosure could be eligible on its own, but individual courts within the same enclosure should be duplicated. Since that was “pre 3.1 refresh,” it’s unclear if that is still accurate or not, or if it is considered an unchanged “definition.” It was deleted at some time, likely when @NianticGiffard was purging threads.
And this is where Roli quoted it as a fact
In my experience, here in the US, separately fenced courts tend to be accepted separately.
Thanks for the information and multiple points of view!
I just stopped by the area earlier and was wondering if I could get some advice/opinions on whether they could/should actually be nominated. The courts have definately seen better days.
Here are a few pictures I took of the court on the right (the one fenced up). Door was unlocked when I got there. I don’t think they even lock it.
Nothing wrong with those courts. We can’t limit wayspots to only areas that are well funded. I would only hesitate if the condition was so bad that it might be dangerous. These are not dangerous.
I’ll have to head over there again later in the week. I wasn’t sure so I didn’t even create the draft/nomination while I was there. I’ll definitely update once I submit it and get a verdict.
