■申立書
This nomination was rejected with the reason stated in the review: “The location of the submission does not match the photos and/or map.” However, since this stone monument actually exists at the site and can be clearly seen on Google Maps Street View, I believe this is an inappropriate reason for rejection. (Google Maps: Google Maps ) I believe this rejection was due to a lack of thorough verification on the part of the reviewer. Please note that the stone monument nominated here is a marker known as an “origin road marker,” which was once installed in each municipality to indicate the starting point of a road. Since there is currently no obligation to install origin road markers, they are no longer being erected, and many have already been removed. This is one of the few that has been carefully preserved to this day, and it can be considered a valuable historical document bearing the name of a village that has since been abolished. For this reason, I believe it meets the eligibility criteria for “A great place for exploration.”
If this is visible on google streetview, I would resubmit. This seems equivalent to the milestones in the UK, which are all definitely eligible as long as pedestrian access is not a problem. They are also historic, preserved and no longer created.
As long as that is safely accessible (which I cannot tell from that image, but would definitely be a check I would make), I would accept that on review. It definitely meets exploration criteria.
(Also, there is no such thing as 'just a regular milestone", just as there is no such thing as “just a regular vertical garden wall”. That last one is on a separate thread.)
I can’t tell if these Wayspot reviews came from machine learning or Wayfarer reviewers, but what is clear is that the object definitely exists.
It might have some historical value, but I also think it matters whether the local community or government actually cares about it and whether it stands out in the area.
Reviewing by Street View, the Wayspot does exist, but it doesn’t look like something the community or authorities consider important; if it were a valuable historical site, you’d expect it to be better maintained.
Plus, the marker itself is pretty small, which might be why it wasn’t considered unique enough.
That’s just how it looks to me when I try to view it objectively.
So, if I were in your shoes, I might approve it if I were reviewing it.
But since I don’t think it’s that great of a wayspot, I probably wouldn’t nominate it myself.
Not the case in the UK for milestones. Some of them get maintained, but some get covered in moss and grass and can be nearly invisible. They’re still listed by the UK milestones society and on geograph, and people still explore (for) them
