………………ye
Hey there, can you also show the supporting photos of your examples? If the combination of these photos make it difficult to confirm the submitted location for reviewers, it maybe could just have been that as an issue.
You can only have a maximum of 2 appeals, of which each one refreshes after 20 days after last being used, so you’d need to wait to gain those back again
Hello and welcome @coasterf
It is not always obvious where to post topics. The appeals area is for some specific types of appeals. I am moving this to nomination support as that is a more appropriate area for your situation.
1 Like
Hiya!
I can understand the frustration that you’re feeling
Its not the same nomination, but I have a similar experience with trail markers in my area. I can submit very similar kinds of nomination for 2 trail markers and one may be accepted and the other rejected
My advice to you is to take the pictures for these submissions using your phone camera app, so that the images are saved to your phone. Then if something is rejected, simply resubmit from home. I think this would be faster than waiting for so many appeals. These items are not ineligible so I see no issue with resubmitting them several times to try to get a good outcome
One minor point is you can try to get a closer up image of the little plaques in the main photo, and you could even take a cleaning cloth with you to give it a little wipe first and make it really stand out. It might help!
My other tip would be to show the door numbers of the houses in your supporting, and more of the street. It may help reviewers locate the item more easily
Good luck
1 Like
Ok, these are poor supporting photos. Yes you can see the house numbers and the nominated objects, but not the surrounding area that well. If then people also don’t use street view in combination with the rest of the information, this could be any house with the number 10 for example. On some of those you almost exclusively photographed the ground
I would recommend to retry all of those with new supporting photos
2 Likes
And also include a reference to tracesofwar.nl that website lists all stolpersteine in the Netherlands as well.
1 Like
As a submitter you should always put in the work to make a good as possible nomination. From what I see here the description can be greatly improved and supporting images are very difficult to match with street view.
Some locations might not yet be on tracesofwar, but you can submit there as well, doing the community outside of wayfarer also a favour 
2 Likes
About the stolpersteine project for example (see: Startseite | Stolpersteine)? Just repeating the title as a description is not informative.
The fact that some others have been approved does not justify it being of sufficient quality to always be accepted. People are trying to help you make better nominations here, I would use that advice to improve when resubmitting.
1 Like
They look like little plaques, so could you write what is on the plaque in the description? Its hard to tell from screenshots of photos but it looks like they have words on them
I think what people are saying is the supporting pics are mainly looking at the ground. I would try to show much more of the street while also showing the plaques, so people can match the shape of the buildings and street to the map. That should make it easier to get them accepted 
If ur rejection is rejected by Machine Learning (as per that quote), the only other way is to resubmit or appeal. ML work by screening most of ineligible submission.but in the proses, there will be some good submission falsely rejected. You can complain but that wont make your submission accepted. Since machine is the one reject your nomination. If you cant get pass ML, i suggest you resubmit with different photo.
I know there had been abuse involving tiles inserted into a area of pavers to submit as Wayspots. It surprises me more when ML doesn’t reject this kind of nomination than when it does. I wish you luck with these.
Some are being rejected by Machine Learning, and some are rejected again on appeal.
Do staff monitor Nomination Support to find cases to reconsider, though?
It would be great if our groupthink could prescribe a series of steps that would allow these all to sail through in renomination (assuming that OP can easily return to each location), but it would be far easier for staff to acknowledge that these stumbling blocks are valid and have been properly submitted.
The Appeals staff may need to hear of the decision, too.
People have provided several suggestions to improve the nominations:
- Better supporting images.
- Better description, explaining what the project is about.
- Better supporting information, linking to online sources, such as tracesofwar.nl
They are everywhere 
2 Likes
What’s a solpersteine? If I happened to be in Germany or NL and decided to do some reviewing, that word might have no meaning to me. A brief description of how it meets criteria is literally the least you can do as the submitter.
1 Like
Steine is stone, but not finding anything about solpar.
Edit: Solpar in Dutch is solar, so you could say these are sun stones. However, they said stolpersteine, which translates to stumbling blocks from German to English.
They are known as stumbling stones.
I was really moved when I found them on a visit to Germany.
It’s a good example of learning something through wayfarer.
I think the critical point is should there be a brief description of that in each supplementary info. Just like you would expect for anything.
1 Like
Oh, I seen them in the forums before, remembrance stones for those that perished during the H0l0caust. Seaprincess spelled it sopler instead of stopler, which mixed me up at first.
1 Like