Wayspot is no longer publicly accessible and unsafe for players

Wayspot Appeals
21

Please stop claiming this area as rural. Objectively, it is built up and there is no chance under any subjective understanding that it can be justifiably claimed as rural.

22

There is a clear definition of Rural, It is not subjective.

If the waypoint is on SFPRP then you need to find evidence to this. If you can’t or it is unsafe to do so then you can easily ignore it as stated above.

23

Yes I have better idea on how people describe different kind of city.

It should be my bad describing this village a “RURAL AREA”. It should be my own opinion because it’s more under develop compare to other city in our county.

However, I do think “SFPRP”, “publicly accessible” and “safety” issue are considered the important element for one wayspot as it’s clearly stated in WAYFARER MAIN PAGE.

That’s why we are trying to remove in based on those those ineligible criteria.

24

Agree on your point.

My bad using rural area. It could be my personal point of view.

But let’s come back to the topic: What’s the evidence needed to prove the lot is SFPRP? Have you every tried once or do you have any suggestions on proving it SFPRP?

I can try talking to the owner. But what documents are needed to become a valid evidence?

25

Yea my bad using it as RURAL AREA.

But it’s not the main topic to be discussed.

Would be glad of you could provide more constructive suggestions. My community and me would be greatly appreciate your opinion regarding the main topic :folded_hands:

26

@elijustrying showed a streetview location from which it appears you can safely approach the wayspot.

Take a video that matches with the streetview images and continues towards the wayspot confirming the wayspot is on SFPRP.

Alternatively, take a series of photos that start with matching streetview and unambiguously approaches the wayspot, confirming it is on SFPRP.

1 Like
27

Thanks for that.

Apart of photo of latest street view, any documents needed to prove it’s owned by the owner?

28

They would help, but they cannot be essential (mandatory) because that would be tricky in a lot of cases. You need your images to be matched to what streetview shows so that Niantic can tell you are definitely showing the right place. My suggestion is comparable to extending streetview :slight_smile:

1 Like
29

I definitely agree that sfprp should be removed, so if you can evidence that the shrine is sfprp then maybe Niantic will take another look. I think the pictures maybe were not enough to show its sfprp.

3 Likes
30

Thanks for your help :folded_hands:

31

Yeaa, truly thanks for your helps :folded_hands:

1 Like
32

Just one last question before I submit more photo.

May I ask @paulingzubat & @elijustrying , should I reopen a topic and submit more evidences since Niantic Team tick my appeal “solved” or just posting the info here in the same topic ?

33

You can continue to add here, it keeps it all together.

We can always remove the solved tag :smiling_face_with_sunglasses:

1 Like
34

As I said somewhere else, the ambassadors are our gods :wink:

3 Likes
35

You can speak to this owner and let them know that they can request that Niantic remove the Pokemon Go game location if they don’t want players there.

2 Likes
36

Thanks a lot :folded_hands::folded_hands::folded_hands:

37

Yea, I was thinking to do this. But what’s the document needed from them? Can I be a proxy of the owner?

I afraid they don’t want to deal with it himself because the owner seems quite old and they only speak mandarin and local dialect (which he used to scold us :new_moon_face:)

38

The form is linked at the top here, but is easy to find with a search.

1 Like
39

You cannot be a proxy. It needs to be a landowner or other party with responsibility for the land, as Niantic will want proof.

2 Likes
40

That’s would be a challenge. Anyhow thanks for the information :folded_hands::folded_hands::folded_hands: