I’m likely to have forgotten it by then, even if that’s only a few hours time!
The odds are that I reviewed yours, as the supporting photo was indeed from the opposite side of the street. I didn’t look at that until checking streetview - for me, the supporting photo for postboxes is fairly redundant almost every time, since it can rarely prove anything.
I must resist! I must resist!
I can share this now.
My description was not great as I had about 2 minutes to get to where I needed to be, and that was about 5 minutes away, and I was submitting for both Wayfarer and Recon.
The main point I noted though was Supporting Photo.
100% tooting my own horn here 
but all I did was cross the road and took a photo which included the Nomination. I’m seeing a lot of supporting photos where you can’t see the Nomination at all and they don’t help.
This is painful. I finally get a legitimate Edward VII postbox to review. It’s on streetview, definitely. It’s not a fake. And I have to reject it.
Not for the slightly poor title (would it hurt to say what road it is on?) but for something I nearly didn’t notice as I was too busy checking streetview.
“Edward VII Postbox”
[edited to correct the wrong king in my first sentence]
I had to look that one up..
Even the legendary Thurn-und-Taxis Post could only trace its origin back to 1490..
Oops - editing my post since I got confused. You can’t see why I rejected it?
Animals in the picture? Is that a VW T-Rex? 
Licence plate!
(I feel better now for missing it initially)
What did you do on this one out of curiosity? I’ve seen some people that would reject for incorrect/false information and some that would report.
I would probably simply reject under inaccurate text, especially if everything else was ok.
The odd ing at the start makes me wonder if someone was cut and paste error. I have several standard texts to paste in. I know that an ERII isn’t acceptable but not everyone does.
It seemed like a deliberate misrepresentation, so I reported it.
Also the number plate was just about readable and also “ing” instead of “King”.
Doh I did think of King - I was thinking of some sort of reminder about Ingress 
I’d reject as an abusive submission. It’s a deliberate attempt to pass off an ineligible EIIR postbox as an eligible GVR one. There is nothing accidental about this, apart from the cut-and-paste accident.
If they had tried to obscure the ERII then that is moving it into maliciousness for me. But as you say accidents happen
It’s very hard to see an EIIR postbox and mistake it for a GVR one. It’s even harder if you know all about postboxes (the description suggests this).
I have made some stupid mistakes with cut and paste in my time.
And I have seen the opposite of this something described as ERII when it was one of the other monarchs that are eligible. When I see those I think it is a silly mistake so why think the opposite here when so many think ERII are eligible.
I currently picked up a different kind of mistake I made just in time. I submitted a nomination and the supplementary I used GPSmapcamera as it was a wooded area. Great. all looked ok on contributions page. But as I was going through camera roll so a much bigger picture I realised that the watermark was wrong. It had printed the information from the previous picture I had taken. Luckily the thumbnail on the watermark showed that up. It was a pure accident that the photo was now wrong. A reviewer could have thought it was deliberate mis match of information. I can withdraw and resubmit at another time as there is another photo with the correct information. But it was a reminder that accidents do happen.
It’s a real GR postbox that isn’t in the game and can be seen on streetview?
What is it that makes so many submitters so lazy?
Bad title and description and visible number plate. Else it’s a great find..
