Ok, so I have a little issue here. There’s a church where I live that has been around since 1926, and has been at its current location since 1983. It used to be called First Assembly of God, but it changed its name to Northview Church in 2018. They didn’t change their denomination, still a part of Assemblies of God.
There are already a few photos at this Wayspot showing the updated signage with the current name; Lightship also has the main photo as the current name, but it’s still listed as First Assembly of God. Here’s their About Us section of their website where they list their history:
I’m just wondering if I can submit both a title and description edit, especially to update the church to it’s current name, or would that be viewed as trying to repurpose the Wayspot. Thanks in advance!
I think the thing that makes a difference to NIantic is the question of what was originally approved. If the church building was nominated, and it still remains a church, you should be able to update the title with no difficulty.
Your example looks like it originally nominated the signboard as a sculpture/statue. Is this still the same object, with updated text, or is it a totally new and different object?
It seems like you may have some flexibility to remove/replace or else update, depending on the facts at hand and what you wish to accomplish.
I may be all wrong, though. Perhaps Niantic sees church-related nominations as more like murals and parks (easy to update) and not like British Pubs.
No, it’s the same sign, just with the current name on it. There are other photos there with the old name on the sign, some more than 10 years old, so most likely was an Ingress import to PoGo, or just an import from another 3rd party source. Nothing has changed for the sign or the church except for the name.
I’ve only submitting a few churches and all have been approved as such. I didn’t fully look at the location types; the best types would be place name sign and church; it certainly isn’t much of a sculpture/statue.
Maybe I will try first to submit an edit to the location types, to make it align with it being a place name sign for a church, and see if that gets accepted. If it does, then I may try the edits. If not, I may have to try the hard way, but then Niantic may just edit it to reflect the correct name and location types. That’s what they did when I requested removal of a tennis court that was turned into a pickleball court a few months ago.
In poking around stuff around here, I noticed that a lot of churches have undergone various types of rebranding (changed names, closed and a new congregation taking over the premise, etc). And it can often been seen in both wayspot images and historical data like GMaps Street View “other dates” feature.
Actually, now that I think about it, I just had a couple of similar renames approved a couple of weeks ago.
The sign is at the southeast corner of the parking lock, at the corner of 25th St S and 35th Ave S. If I have to appeal them, I hope the evidence I have will be enough.
Not sure if I have misunderstood
but the picture of the sign is acting as the photo for the actual church. The title is clear that the POI is the church. In that case the pin location should be on the church, and I would expect it to be at the entrance.
So if that is where it is, it should stay put.
If there are photos attached to a wayspot that are not relevant you could ask help chat to remove the irrelevant photos. You can provide geotagged photos and the weblink to demonstrate the relevance.
Is the church not worth of a picture? This is a great opportunity to get a good picture of the actual church and move away from signfarer.
I’m not wanting to move the location at all; I want it to stay on the entrance of the church, which is where it’s currently at. The sign really isn’t deserving of its own Wayspot.
The photos are are mix of this sign with the new and old name on it, if I remember correctly, but it’s the exact same sign. Even looking at the sign on Street View and going back through the years, you can see when it was named First Assembly of God, then changed to Northview. Same sign, just different name and fresh coat of paint.
I can’t say if there is a photo of the church as I haven’t been out to it in awhile, but it was one that I was thinking needed an edit. The church’s entrance is pretty nice on Street View, so I could take a photo if there isn’t one added yet. It is a lot of glass though, but from a distance and the right angle, I think I can still take a good photo.
Hopefully I can get out there in the afternoon; it was a polling location for the election today, so may have been busy. They might have youth services tomorrow, but if I get there before school gets out, that won’t be an issue.
@AliceWonder1511 Oh, that does help! Like I said, I have the info to back up the name change.
If you’re worried about repurposing, maybe Help Chat is a better option than doing the edit yourself? That way if something is against a policy they just wont do it and you wont get in trouble
Personally it makes complete sense to me to just update it all, but Niantic’s policies on repurposing make no sense to me because they aren’t consistent and aren’t explained anywhere
I honestly don’t understand this sentence. When is a church ever rejected? If you’re never going to reject a church, why does it matter if it’s “the same” church or “a different” church. And how do you prove that it is different?
I understand this thinking for restaurants, but not for churches.
But there is a possibility if it’s a different church altogether. That’s why it needs to be vetted for eligibility which would not be possible during an edit review.
You’ve cited “school in the same building” as a reason to reject churches. but beyond that, are there really any reasons whatsoever to reject? why does it matter? what must be re-vetted? like it or not, most folks hold tightly to “categorical eligibility” and churches are at or near the top of that list. Additionally, you’ve said in the past that murals are the lone exception for this policy about replacement/repurposing. What is it about murals that makes them special? Is it because they always are eligible? Why can’t that apply here? If it’s simply because of the concern about schools, then why can’t this be treated like any other thing which could at any time change to become ineligible and then handle it via the removal process if/when that happens?
Unfortunately, it’s not possible for me to share the reason here. I just clarified our official stance. Locations or businesses that have been permanently closed meet the removal criteria and should be removed.
