Hi,
Unfortunately, a wayspot simply disappeared from one day to the next for no apparent reason. The spot was in the game for months and was used not only by me and my friends, but by many players. It fulfilled all the criteria that make it a valid spot, so the decision to delete it is incomprehensible to me. I would ask you to please review this case and comment on the reason for this decision, which seems arbitrary to me.
I’d imagine it was removed because it appears that the wayspot doesn’t have safe pedestrian access. It’s located on the wall directly beside a road with no sidewalk. While that road may not be frequently travelled, it appears to be a side road, it is nonetheless a road.
It’s also very generic graffiti which isn’t exactly eligible anyway, but I doubt that played a part in the Wayspots removal.
It is actually more of a path than a road, and a traffic-calmed area in which pedestrians and motorists share the path and show consideration for each other. The path is used more for walking than for driving. What’s more, it has recently been restricted to walking speed. There are always lots of cyclists and pedestrians on the road. As already mentioned, I am very surprised that the spot is no longer available, which is a real shame. It would just be a great thing if someone wrote about it again. I can’t quite understand it. This spot was played a lot, for months. It’s sad
Then I absolutely don’t understand why the advert was approved in the first place. You can also see from the section on the map in the attached screenshot that it is not a normal road. The way is marked much narrower. As is also the case in reality. I would like to invite Niantic to come and see for themselves. Seriously. Unfortunately, I don’t understand this arbitrariness. I’ve known the area for years and the decision-makers at Niantic from a picture on the internet. It is not for nothing that the translation of the name is "Valleypath“ and not “Valleystreet”.
The spot is located by a wall on a beautiful valley path, which invites you to go for a walk, cycle and linger. Along the path you can enjoy nature and at the same time watch various trains of the neighbouring railway. The traffic is moderate (traffic-calmed, walking speed, only one direction) and reserved for a very few residents. Walkers and the few residents show consideration for each other, as is the case with country lanes etc. Not far from this valley path runs the cycle highway, a green traffic artery in the Ruhr area that is used by many people on bikes, scooters, inline skates and also on foot. An area that invites you to discover and explore.
“It is actually more of a path than a road, and a traffic-calmed area in which pedestrians and motorists share the path and show consideration for each other.”
Those are your words. Cars driving on it make it a road.
I’m not interested in going 12 rounds on this, you asked why it was removed and I told you my thoughts. It’s generic and it’s unsafe.
Hello and welcome! I have not looked at the location concerns or at the trail situation but the object strikes me rather as vandalistic graffiti, which doesn’t meet eligibility criteria and usually meets removal ones as vandalism. In this situation it doesn’t matter how long it’s been there.
“Being in a nice place to look at” is unfortunately not sufficient to meet criteria either, I mean, so is my office
All of this put together makes me think it’s unfortunately unlikely to be restored.
It’s a dangerous bet to refer to existing wayspots when making the argument why something could be eligible. These could have been approved a long time ago when criteria were different, by mistake or as a result of abuse. There are a lot of approved wayspots out there that don’t meet criteria and could therefore be removed at any time. I would therefore not use them as examples.
I would suggest looking for something more permanent to nominate in the area. There are many people on here that are good at scouting satellite or Street View to help others find potential nominations and could potentially help out.
Many people walk in this area and the path connects two neighbourhoods. In summer, many children play here, ride bikes and so on. That’s just the way it is in a densely populated area. Not everyone lives in the countryside, unfortunately.
I know this area well and this route is by no means unsafe in any way. If this was the relevant criterion, I could think of at least 100 other stops that would have to disappear in the same way. I’m just turning to this forum in the hope of getting a response from Niantic. I would just like to know why they decide “one way” today and “another way” tomorrow. It just seems a bit arbitrary and that’s what I don’t really understand. Then they should also pursue this policy consistently because there are hundreds of spots here that shouldn’t be here if that were the criterion for disappearance.
I don’t think it’s a stretch to say that this example looks most like the ineligible one on this link. I’d encourage spending a little time brushing up on the whole page, too. This is a relatively new clarification on reviewing and criteria.
While on one had I encourage not going on a “My Wayspot was removed, now I’ll report everyone else’s,” you certainly may report Wayspots that you feel meet removal criteria. Removed, unsafe, temporary or highly likely to be removed, or single family private residential property are some of the reasons for removal, or “created through abuse.”
Of course I’m not going to report other spots out of frustration. That makes no sense and is not my intention. But thanks for your link and thanks to everyone for your advice. I would just appreciate a final statement from Niantic. If the topic discussed here was the decisive point at all. We don’t know, it is what it is.
I’d also like to chime in as I may have a few more insights.
This is a small off path road so pedestrian access is iffy, while I certainly expect Niantic staff to see this as ineligible, it is not the sole reason for removal.
The reason for removal is what Gendgi shared - random smearings on a wall are ineligible.
Also, in Nordrhein-Westfalen, many such Wayspots got incorrectly accepted by a voting ring. So you will see a lot of totally ineligible and removable Wayspots in your state, but just because they exist as a Wayspot, it doesn’t mean they can ever be accepted again, withstand a report or be reinstated.
You are not underestimating this, there are still thousands of Wayspots live in NRW like that one.
This Wayspot will most likely not be reinstated, I know you really want an answer by the staff, but they will tell you roughly the same in a more formal manner.
