Wayspot removal request Town private clinic

This Weyspot shows the sign for a small medical clinic in town.
It is not a large hospital, but a privately run clinic with only a few parking spaces, as shown in the photo. Also, there is no safe sidewalk on the adjacent road.

Title of the Wayspot: [MIYAJI NAIKA](English)「Miyaji Internal Medicine」
Location: [Latitude 35.17022/Longitude 137.03797]
City: [NAGAKUTE city]
Country [JAPAN]

Screenshot of the Rejection Email: [Attach Screenshot]

Photos to support your claim: [Attach photo]
A photo registered as a Wayspot.

Photo taken from the same position.

A photo taken with a building in the background. (Looking east from west)
The sign is located within the clinic grounds.

On the other hand, here is a photo taken from the east looking west.
There is no sidewalk on the public road.

Google Maps PDF
The building slightly to the right of the center is the Wayspot.

Google Street PDF
As you can see, it is a privately run clinic. The sign is on private property and there is no safety zone (sidewalk) on the public road.

As you all know, the town’s privately run clinics are not suitable for Weyspot. The Weyspot sign is located within the clinic’s grounds, and there is no safety zone (sidewalk) on the public road outside, so players will naturally enter the clinic’s grounds.
Please remove these Weyspots immediately before players cause trouble for doctors and patients.

Recently, Wayspots that question common sense have been popping up all over the place.
It seems like this happens every time a Global Challenge is held. I’d like to think I’m mistaken, but the timing is just too good.
Either way, am I the only one who feels like the Wayfarers’ judging skills have deteriorated significantly?

thank you.

It definitely seems like it has gotten easier to get things approved. I also feel like it’s difficult rejecting things that obviously shouldn’t be a Wayspot with the current phrasing of the review questions (at least in English). Most of the questions deal with the location and not the object itself. :thinking:

Thanks for the appeal, @miracleyanng We took another look at the Wayspot in question and decided that it does not meet our criteria for removal at this time.


Thank you for the review. However, I cannot understand why this Weispot “does not meet the removal criteria”.
I understand that the “ineligibility criteria” and “removal criteria” are not the same.

“A place that’s good for exercise.”
“A place where you can socialize.”
“Your favorite restaurant or cafe.”
I know that there are cases where a Weyspot can exist even if it doesn’t meet the above criteria.

1. It is a privately run clinic.
(It is not a large public hospital with a large site. The space is small.)
(If players gather, there is a high possibility that it will cause inconvenience to patients and doctors during treatment.)

2. There are no sidewalks that can make play safe.
(In this forum for review, most Wespots that do not have access to safe sidewalks have been deleted or have had their requests for reinstatement rejected.)
I believe that at the very least, these two points “meet the criteria for deletion.”

However, if Atlas says that this is not the case, then
1. Privately run clinics are “businesses,” and there is no problem with entering their surroundings or on their premises.
2. Weyspots adjacent to public roads are not necessarily subject to removal, even if they do not have pedestrian protection such as sidewalks.

I have no choice but to interpret the above two points as “officially acknowledged by Niantic.”
Please let me know if I’m wrong.

And to all the Weyfarers who have visited this forum, I have a request.
If there is a “privately run clinic” Weyspot in your country or area, could you please attach a photo (Google Maps PDF, etc.) and show it to me?
I can change my way of thinking about the future of Weyspots.

Thank you.

Hi, maybe I can try to provide some context for why this interaction went the way it went.

  1. I have not researched the details as unfortunately it would be hard for me language-wise, but what you are describing looks like something that should not be approved. You are right in that it likely doesn’t meet eligibility criteria.
  2. Wayspots on the territory of areas with limited access (eg. businesses) are not inherently ineligible as long as they are accessible to someone (on top of that, this seems to be outside of the business).
  3. I know this is disappointing, but removal criteria usually include major issues such as being a fake or being on single-family private residential property. These criteria do not include the wayspot being simply ineligible, like yours. There is frequently a lot of discussion on this forum regarding whether removal criteria and eligibility criteria should be aligned, or regarding the generic wayspots that cannot get removed as a result. You can check for example one such thread here. Niantic! Stop approving ineligible, boring, generic Wayspots!

This is why we always say not to trust approved wayspots or rulings on this forum as references for your own nominations (these could be erroneously approved, approved through abuse, approved historically with a very different set of criteria, etc), but only the official criteria. I understand you are being ironic but I would suggest not telling your community to assume those things as this can backfire. :slight_smile:


When Niantic refused my removal request for a covering over a drive-thru drop-off area of a surgical center, I sent the center an email letting them know the portal/pokestop was there, and told them how to ask Niantic to remove it if they felt there would be an issue. The center personnel were very nice about it, and the Wayspot is gone. Niantic will respect a property owner’s request.

1 Like