The “小金沢町第六生産緑地” is 25.75 meters off, and the “ 大金沢町第四生産緑地” is 5.17 meters off. Whether these deviations are acceptable as tolerable errors is at the discretion of the Wayfarer team. And above all, if the reason for deletion was that it was private farmland, I must submit proof refuting that to restore the Wayspot. That’s why I asked the first four questions.
I see, I finally understand your point.
In that case, I don’t think there’s any need to debate the significance of Production Green Spaces.
While I do want to restore the PokéStop, if the reason for its removal was due to the stake or the landowner’s decision, then I understand that as unavoidable. My only remaining question is why, in this particular location, this happened, while stakes and Production Green Spaces in other areas or nearby are still successfully used as PokéStops.
From what I found, many Production Green Spaces are used as Gyms or other Wayspots, and especially in rural areas, these kinds of spots are often the only important local facilities. Personally, I still believe that some automated process may have filtered this one out. Even if this land is privately owned rather than city-owned, I find it unlikely that the elderly people who own these rural lands are aware of what a Wayspot is.
Even if they weren’t elderly, the area is so large and sparsely populated that most people probably wouldn’t even know that this place is designated as a PokéStop.
Thank you for the constructive conversation.
Wayspots don’t get removed by any automated/filtering process. Niantic do not go through the database to see what is not eligible.
They may have been reported, either by someone physically there or someone who saw them while reviewing something else. An amendment might have been submitted (location, title, description) and the staff reviewing this might have taken other actions.
Hey @GUTSTEACHER , welcome to the Wayfarer Community Forum. I have looked into the location and made some adjustments. Once the changes get synced, you should see the eligible Wayspots appear in the Niantic games.
Regards,
Thank you for your previous assistance.
These Wayspots were active for a while, but they have unfortunately been removed again.
Could you please let me know the reason for their removal? Also, is it possible to have them restored once more?
• 小金沢町第六生産緑地 (35.550764, 140.179800)
• 大金沢町第四生産緑地 (35.549474, 140.180093)
Thank you for your time and help.
Apologies for the inconvenience caused. I have restored the Wayspots. Once the changes get synced, you should see the eligible Wayspots appear in the Niantic games.
Regards,
Thank you for your response and for the update.
I have confirmed that “小金沢町第六生産緑地” has been restored. However, “大金沢町第四生産緑地” (35.549474, 140.180093) has not appeared yet, even after waiting for two days.
I also noticed that other similar Wayspots in the surrounding area, which had previously disappeared, have been restored as well.
These were spots I was planning to ask for help with later.
Could you please check this specific location “大金沢町第四生産緑地” once more to see if it was missed?
I have made some adjustments. Please wait for a while and you should see the Wayspot appear in the gameboard.
Thank you for your previous assistance.
These Wayspots were active for a while, but they have unfortunately been removed again.
Could you please let me know the reason for their removal? Also, is it possible to have them restored once more?
• 小金沢町第七生産緑地(35.550462, 140.179372)
• 大金沢町第四生産緑地 (35.549474, 140.180093)
Thank you for your time and help.
I have restored the Wayspots. Please give it some time for the Wayspots to appear on the gameboard. We apologize for the inconvenience caused.
Regards,
While I will not comment on the eligibility of the object itself, I have strong doubts regarding the lack of consistency in these actions.
We are seeing a loop of removal by player report, restoration via the forum, removal by report yet again, and now another restoration. The current situation, where past history is not shared and decisions appear to be made on an ad-hoc basis, causes major confusion within the community.
How long is this fruitless “Tom and Jerry” chase going to continue? I strongly urge you to centrally manage the decision history of Wayspots and demonstrate a consistent standard for your actions.
To add what what was posted above, two wayspots have been removed and restored three times in the space of a few months.
Using the basic principle of first time is an accident, second time is coincidence and third time is deliberate action, Scopely Explore should be treating this third removal seriously including their failure to prevent themselves from doing the actual removal.
Thank you @ARPeggioRev2 @salixsorbus for the feedback,
I understand the frustration about the back and forth changes to these Wayspots. To clarify, a decision is only overturned if the removal or reinstatement was handled incorrectly. The support team can sometimes make errors, but please rest assured we are focusing on improving our processes to limit these issues.
We appreciate your understanding.
Thank you for responding 
One (simple) action could be to flag all wayspots which have been reinstated so that any further removal requests get extra attention (e.g., needing to be checked by a manager). This doesn’t prevent legitimate removal, but would reduce the ping-pong.
Of course, you read my mind 
. It’s a work in progress!
I’ve just realised your statement has a slight flaw, which might just be grammatical or inference. I have seen removals be reversed when it appears that the removal report had incorrect information and the real information shows the wayspot to be valid. One example (which I cannot find a link for) likely used a fake image to show the POI as no longer existing. This is not quite the same as you handling the removal incorrectly.
Thank you for the clarification. I now better understand the structural issue caused by the lack of a centralized decision history system.
Whether it is an improper removal of a valid Wayspot or an improper restoration of an ineligible one, this ad-hoc approach is not desirable for the community.
That being points to consider, I am not the one who has to implement the solution. I simply await the results of your ongoing work on this system.
I completely agree with you that an ad-hoc approach is not ideal.
The exact reason why this specific Wayspot keeps getting removed has never been clear. However, after its location was slightly adjusted during the last review, it has remained active, which suggests there is nothing wrong with the Wayspot itself.
One notable detail is that it had been online without any issues for a very long time, but just last week, I submitted a new, separate nomination nearby. I remember a similar thing happening last time: right after I nominated another new spot, that nomination was rejected, and this existing one was removed as collateral damage. Given this pattern, I strongly suspect that this latest removal might also be due to an AI misjudgment triggered by the new submission process.
It’s probably not something as sophisticated as AI, but rather an automated classification program. That program is likely referencing OpenStreetMap or a similar service. If OpenStreetMap is the cause, you could avoid this endless back-and-forth by accessing it and changing the designation of that location from farmland to green space.
