Honest question, what’s going on with the inconsistency in Wayfarer voting lately?
I have 2 covered pavilions in my community that were approved and are already live as PokéStops. There’s a 3rd pavilion at the far end of the neighborhood that I also nominated, but this one was rejected during voting for supposedly not being “permanent.”
The confusing part is that it’s clearly permanent just like the other two. It has a stone base, is cemented into the ground, and each pavilion has a distinct design.
At this point, what’s the best approach? Just resubmit with better supporting info/photos and hope for different reviewers?
That or appeal it. Nominator and reviewer education are the absolute bear of Wayfarer–I recently had an independently owned fitness gym denied for lacking cultural significance, and I couldn’t help but laugh at it.
That said, with Pavilions, be sure you’re supporting the idea that they’re a great place to socialize or explore in your nominations. The idea that pavilions (or anything) are categorically eligible is a flawed one.
Sadly I already used both my appeals, and both of those submissions ended up getting approved! So that’s nice!
I used a very similar description for this one too, emphasizing that it’s permanent and a community gathering spot. It just feels frustrating because a covered pavilion next to a community pool and right down the road from a playground seems like an obvious social gathering place.
Appeals come back every fifteen days. I’m waiting on mine to refresh at the moment as well. I had to use one earlier in the week when the ML rejected a painting by a local artist and gallerist at a local library. I get your frustration!
Hope yours gets into game as well. Honestly, I wish people knew the criteria and actually looked around the spots/aren’t overly strict if it fits the bill. We should be wanting more Waypoints in game!!
I think its rejected because reviewer considered it not distinct not because its not permanent. Sadly niantic put those rejection together. Well since you ald use your appeal, You can try resubmit first
Hello,
I’m going to amend the title of the topic as it appears to be asking about inconsistency of reviewing not submitting.
Without seeing the whole situation it is difficult to comment.
There are flaws in how people reviewing have to operate that can lead to frustration in a submitter.
First remember that your submission goes to an unknown number of reviewers to be assessed it’s a crowd sourced result.
If the reviewer overall believes that a submission is not meeting criteria overall they need to choose one of the first 4 questions on which to vote towards reject. So it could mean that reviewers thought it was poor.
As has been said unfortunately the rejection reason is 2 parts. It could be that they considered it not distinct from the others.
Most likely is a mixture of the above.
If you wish to show the whole scenario we can comment.
It’s up to you whether to resubmit - think critically about did you make it distinctive? Did you emphasise the social nature of the space?
Alternatively once you have an appeal put together a good case as to why this pavillion should be accepted - a common mistake is simply to say the others have so should this one.