You can see on the pictures that the trail is all part of route in South-Holland. So it is a named trail.
It is called: Wandelroute Netwerk Zuid-Holland
Translation: Hikingroute network South-Holland
Wandelroute netwerk Zuid-Holland is not trails name,
Here you can see all named trails whit map
https://www.meldpuntroutes.nl/wandelen
So if you can find it here you can make your appeal stronger. Since here it show all routes and just node’s
Good luck 
I already know the appeal will work with the text I give, so I don’t need a stronger appeal.
The trail is named Hikingnetwork South-Holland as a translation. And there are specific areas with route names on them, but some don’t so I call them Hikingnetwork South-Holland. I know how to deal with these trail markers. I only wanted help on how this specific one was called a sensitive location.
1 Like
Where is it located?
(51.824626, 4.251316)
The Netherlands
Zuidland
1 Like
Thank you 
Would you show your supporting photo?
By looking up on streetview it’s not obvious for me where to look exactly and there’s a blurred area, maybe that’s the reason for “sensitive” 
Here it is, I did not know that streetview was bad here. I don’t think something interesting is seeable, but ofcourse I could have missed something? Thank you for checking and the help
1 Like
Same question here. We have the same in Wijchen (near Nijmegen) last year all trail marker stickers are removed , but they are valid routes. What is the best way to revert this removals.
A lot of time and effort has been put in these routes, so it would be a nice gesture to restore them.
Hello and welcome @deeptrap
To make a request to restore you need to go to Wayspot Appeals
Do have a good read first as there are several relevant topics about the trails
I review your area too when i see one of yours I’ll let you know.
Welcome to the forums @deeptrap
Trail markers in every form are eligible, I don’t know how they got removed by your area, but appealing them is defenitely worth a shot.
Try to make your case as strong as possible with all the removed markers, the info about them, some foto’s to prove that they are still there, why they still meet criteria to this day and an official link from the route always helps any case alot. Good luck, and thanks for your comment.
Welcome to the forums @ficio3
Thanks for your comment. It is actually pretty rare to speak to somebody that reviews my area in my opinion. There are alot of open submissions in our area ready to be voted on. I am not gonna go into much detail since I don’t want a voting ring to be suspected, but thanks for voting on the submissions in my area, whichever decision you make.
1 Like
Thanks!
I usually accept those trail markers as long as the main picture is close up. And its visable on street view.
1 Like
I have another example here wich i don’t accept. Too much in the background (even cars with plates)
This would be a OK for me if it was zoomed in more/ cropped
This is a wrong judgement. The markers are clearly visible. Remember, we are submitting the trail, not the actual marker for the trail, so it doesn’t need to be zoomed in as much as you likr. This picture is a perfect balance between that.
The problem i have are the cars in the background(with plates) wich are clearly stated in the rules as a big no no, remember this is the main picture not the support picture.
I wouldn’t worry about them. It’s not humanly possible to read the license plates.
I’ll keep that in mind for the next time. Thanks
I’ll be a bit less strict on these but i still prefer less in the background.
I am a bit surprised that this picture made it past the auto-assess bot Emily. And @ficio3 you do need to be careful about posting other people’s nominations here. The submitter may well see this.
I can’t tell from this screenshot whether the car number plates are legible. If they are, then this is a reason to reject for poor photo.
Ignoring that…..with regard to whether this is an acceptable photo or not. It’s a judgement call as to whether a photo is good enough. It doesn’t need to be perfect. It’s a little annoying that the focus and central point is a tree trunk and not the arrows, and it may be that the photo disc in Pokemon Go ends up not great at showing what it is. But in my view that aspect does not make it rejectable as it does show the object. So or IDK depending on your judgement.
There may be other aspects of this submission that would make it something that is getting overall positive or negative responses I can’t tell or comment as there is too little.
4 Likes
The only reason to reject something like this due to the photo would be if the car license plates were visible - I can’t tell at this size/quality if they are or not. But assuming the plates aren’t readable, the photo is perfectly adequate.
The reason it’s adequate is because the item is clearly visible, the photo isnt very dark, it isnt blurry, and isnt taken through a car window, and is not tilted/strangely oriented. It might not be to your personal tastes, but its perfectly okay in terms of the picture guidelines to frame the picture like this. Pictures don’t need to be perfect to meet the guidelines.
Edit: oops Elijustrying beat me to it 
1 Like