When submitting a Wayspot Appeal, make sure to include as much of the following information as possible:
- Wayspot Title: An entrance sign to the beautiful ravine of magrath heights
- Location (lat/lon): (53.445138,-113.551487)
- City: Edmonton
- Country: Canada
- Screenshot of the Rejection Email (do not include your personal information):
- Additional Information (if any): This wayspot is using an AI generated landmark that does not exist in real life. The path to the ravine exists, but the sign in the photo is fabricated, and the main subject of the wayspot is the sign itself. There are many red flags in the image that make it clear that is is manipulated. I reported this when it came up in my review, but it seems to have snuck through anyway.
Signs of it being AI generated:
- Visible shift/discontinuity of the sidewalk pavement under the sign
- Right hand vehicle bollard disappeared
- Landscaping on the right hand side has fully changed, including changing the shape of sidewalk.
- Fence on right hand side has fully disappeared.
- Background trees are now conifers, whereas they are actually deciduous in real life.
- Rooftop patio on the left hand house has disappeared in the AI photo.
- The fence on the left side has more posts than it did before.
- Shrubs on the left side have changed species.
On top of that, the ravine is actually the “Whitemud Creek Ravine” - the city would not put up a sign with an incorrect name. If the argument is that it isn’t a city sign, then ostensibly, it would be on single-family private property, which makes it ineligible anyway.
Here is the Google Maps street view:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/DdnveCDNdYnoakPZ9
The submitted photo on the wayspot:
An additional indication with the photo is that the posts are not in line when they go into the ground. Escher would be proud of the way this has been done.
Solely that + the line of the path means it is impossible for this photo to be real. Everything else is icing on the cake. @NianticAaron
Wow - I hadn’t even noticed that, but the moment you mentioned it, its all I can see!
I know Scopely don’t like removing wayspots because the only image has a problem, since a faulty image doesn’t deny the possibility of the wayspot itself being legitimate, but this is not that situation. This is a fake sign, so the POI does not exist.
I have had a look on the map shown when submitting wayspots and this is not showing there. It is still on the main wayfarer map, but that is expected. The submission map is up-to-date and the wayfarer map takes time to get updated.
It’s possible this has been removed.
the ‘grass’ is a dead giveaway for me. That is never how grass grows anywhere on earth (or at least nowhere that ive ever seen), and is present in every single AI generated image that ive seen go through the review process. Zoom in on the ‘grass’ and it starts too look REAL uncanny.
Neat - I didn’t know OpenAI had a tool for detecting if an image was created by their tools. I’ll have to keep that in mind for other questionable review images that look ‘off’. Thanks!
Google does too, it’s integrated into Gemini, just type @synthID or @verifyAI
I think this has now been removed. It isn’t showing on the Submission map (which is up-to-date) and although it still shows on the Wayfarer Map (which has a delay before updating), new reports fail (which is what happens when a wayspot is still showing but has already been removed).
