Description: A series of three Trophy cases that hold awards and trophies won by Pickering sports teams as far back as 2006
Supporting Info: An important part of Pickering’s sports history
Two things before I start:
1st: I will preface this with, I’m going to appeal this when I get one back.
2nd: This isn’t in a school, or near a school, or beside a school. It’s in a public arena in the middle of an industrial district. The K-12 rejection is absurd.
I am more making this post to understand why people would vote this down as temporary, is it because the trophies leave the case to be presented to the winners?
I’m just confused, this isn’t the first time this has happened.
1 Like
For anyone wondering, it’s at 43.82819838028432, -79.06908500192617. Not on school grounds, so that rejection reason is wrong.
The description and supporting info could be improved upon. I’d point out more of the importance of the trophies, such as what some were for or what players/teams they were given to. That’s why I can see people voting it down as not being distinct.
1 Like
The arena already has four portals. I can see people rejecting this as not distinct. I doubt they thought it was temporary. Like Nvl said, indoor nominations struggle.
It only takes one person mis-clicking on a rejection reason for it to show up, as you know, so I think you are correct to dismiss the K-12 rejection.
I would have taken the photo in landscape orientation to get rid of a bunch of the ceiling and floor. I wonder if ML would have accepted it cropped to a clearer focus on the cases.
2 Likes
I agree, I think the focuses on the “not Distinct” Part of the temporary or not distinct criterion. If there are multiple trophy cases in the arena, it could very well be that reviewers felt another one wasn’t distinct enough to be worthy of a wayspot, or distict enough to tell them apart.
When you appeal this decision, I would recommend that you provide the reviewers with evidence that the trophy display is in fact permanent. You may want to refer to them to the following link, Pickering Hockey Association welcomes new trophies. This article specifically refers to “the trophies will take up their permanent home in a new trophy case in Don Beer Arena”. I would also refer them to the following link - https://ehq-production-canada.s3.ca-central-1.amazonaws.com/77f9ebd228e50065c9a8adc7b8acdbf4dfeaac5e/original/1714513385/f45289b336e4c1a51cc5dcde48c7853c_City_of_Pickering_Arena_Strategy_Final_Draft_March_2024.pdf?X-Amz-Algorithm=AWS4-HMAC-SHA256&X-Amz-Credential=AKIA4KKNQAKIOR7VAOP4%2F20240802%2Fca-central-1%2Fs3%2Faws4_request&X-Amz-Date=20240802T113030Z&X-Amz-Expires=300&X-Amz-SignedHeaders=host&X-Amz-Signature=406ff63b11f2cd84f3c33bdc1c30dedcda4c6562174065b7f0acc7da7a73ef4d - as evidence that the arena is owned by the City of Pickering and is not a school.
Does the trophy display contain original trophies or have they been replaced by replicas (i.e. the original trophy has been returned)? This may be something you might need to clarify as it will strengthen any argument made about the importance / history of this display to your local community.
The rest is up to you regarding your supporting commentary to demonstrate that your nomination meets at least one of the qualifying criteria to be treated as an acceptable wayspot.
Good luck
2 Likes
Yeah, I’ll eat that. I actually meant to go and pretty it up a little bit but clearly forgot lol
1 Like
Considering the none of the 4 portals are trophy cases, or anything resembling trophy cases I doubt that’s the case…
I didn’t say “duplicate” - I meant more along the guidelines about submitting displays in a museum. Not a “distinct” feature at the location. I also said that I could see it, not that I agreed with it.
I know you know as much or more about Wayfarer as I do, so I won’t comment my thoughts on your posts in the future. After all, you wrote the guideline on submissions.
I don’t think you need to go that far, I value your insight. I just happen to disagree with you.
That’s all.
