This submission of mine was denied after appeal and the reason given was “does not meet wayfinder criteria, as it is a walking path that has no significance”. Even though this is the criteria which is directly pulled from the website “ A place you’d go to get some fresh air, stretch your legs, or exercise. Places that encourage walking, exercising, and enjoying public spaces. Or something that teaches or encourages us to be our healthiest selves.” Can anyone explain how this does not directly fit the criteria….?
We can’t answer without seeing more of the submission.
1 Like
Welcome. Please share full screenshot of your nomination. But if i look into small cropped photo, it seems you are taking photo of walking path.
Yes it is a path that goes through a neighborhood, it allows walking, jogging, and biking. It is on the housing section of a military base and it was added to promote health and wellness. Please let me know if these screenshots show everything!
I think you might misunderstanding what is considered “Hiking Trail” or “Biking Trail”.
A Hiking Trail is a path that is Destinated to be a good place for Jogging/Walking. Same to Biking trail. You can read this forum post that clarify Trails.
Your example is happen to be a “passenger walk”, which is just…“a path”, nothing more. If there is a sign that clearly show they are an intended location to do jogging, then you can resubmit. Otherwise I believe this is a correct rejection.
A place that *happened* to be walking is different from A place that *intended* to do the walking(Wayfarer Criteria)
Welcome to the forum!
There is a difference between the “Eligibility” criteria and the “Acceptance” criteria.
Eligibility Criteria
A note on eligibility: if a Wayspot nomination meets one of the below criteria, that’s great! But remember that eligibility alone isn’t sufficient to turn a nomination into an accepted Wayspot.
Acceptance Criteria
Nominations and edit submissions must meet all of the following acceptance criteria:
- Must meet at least one of the three eligibility criteria
- A great place for exploration
- A great place for exercise
- A great place to be social with others
- Must be a permanent physical, tangible, and identifiable place or object, or object that placemarks an area
- Must be safe and publicly accessible by pedestrians (indoor or outdoor)
- Must contain accurate information in the title, description, and photo
I keep this bookmarked: Wayspot Criteria — Wayfarer Help Center
In my opinion, this fails the “Acceptance Criteria” by not being a distinct location with a visual anchor that you can recognize when you have arrived at it. If there is a sign for this walkway, I would recognize that as a Wayspot.
Hey!
Yes those screenshots are great. I think the issue with this nomination is that the main picture just shows the pavement, it doesn’t show how to find this specific point - one bit of pavement looks a lot like another after all.
That’s why usually when submitting a trail, we use a picture of a marker or other sign which then can be spotted in the surroundings. Does that make sense?
So with your trail, if there’s anything to point to it, ie a map online or in the area, and any markings or distance markers to help joggers, those would be better as the focus for the nomination and to help with supporting information 
The requirement for an anchor - something to tag the POI to - isn’t an absolute requirement, but it is remarkably hard to get a submission accepted when you don’t have one. This is partly because of lack of distinctiveness - why /this/ precise location rather than any other location. You have to remember that a wayspot has a precise location even when it is representing something that covers an area - such as a football field.
An example might be a path through a named slot canyon that is locally/nationally famous and the path is the only access, but it has no signage and no obvious entrance point. Where exactly should the wayspot go? There is no anchor so it would be very easy to argue that this should be a wayspot, but maybe hard to get accepted.
I suppose this does mean that slot canyons, without signs or a marked entrance, are not eligible, piles of boulders are eligible. Not because the latter are inherently better, but because they are easier to portray as being their own anchors. It’s a little disappointing, even if it does make it easy to explain why paths like this are not eligible.
(In order to make a point, I’m being a little mean about the piles of boulders I have submitted and will continue submitting!)
No, you weren’t mean at all and you explained it perfectly. I understand what I need to include in submissions going forward. Thank you!