Why was this rejected?

Nomination name: Cresleigh Ranch East Entrance Sign

It says rejected for ‘Wayfarer Criteria’

I don’t know why it is rejected, pls help

Which of the eligibility criteria would you say it meets?

This is just a neighborhood sign as far as I can tell. These are equivalent to real estate billboards imo. Wayfarer criteria states that something must be a GREAT place for exercise, exploration, or being social. I fail to see how this meets any of those criteria.

1 Like

Just going to drop this thread here:

1 Like

There is another sign near that one that is an approved wayspot, that’s why I’m confused

1 Like

Since rejection criteria and removal criteria are not the same, you cannot rely on accepted wayspots to determine what will or should be accepted today under the current criteria, nor what should have been accepted in the past, under different criteria.

1 Like

I nominated the other sign and it got approved like a week ago tho so I thought it would also be accepted

1 Like

Congrats! You’re lucky that got approved.

I’d say you got lucky. This sign would have been an auto-reject from me, as it’s quite generic. Yes, signs like this can get through and approved, but they typically do not meet eligibility criteria.

When it comes to neighborhood/apartment signs, there does need to be something unique that makes them great places to be social, exercise, and/or explore. I have approved ones that also serve as pavilions or that have decorative water fountains. A pavilion is a great place to be social, and a decorative water fountain is a great thing to explore.

There’s actually an apartment complex sign that somehow got approved not far from where I live. I so wish that I could request removal, as it’s nothing special. And I know it was approved within the last year, even though I never reviewed it, as I noticed it while checking out a nearby Wayspot for a pedestrian footbridge last September.

I agree, leaving wayspots in game that don’t meet acceptance criteria is confusing. But they don’t usually meet any removal criteria, unless on private residential property or unsafe to access for pedestrians.

I believe a lot of these slipped through voting because reviewers did not know how to reject them in the new review flow.

1 Like

One way of looking at this is that the first sign may have been accepted because the voters saw nothing else nearby, so it seemed kind of unique.

When the second one appeared, voters could see the first one nearby. So much for uniqueness? :person_shrugging: