When submitting a Wayspot Appeal, make sure to include as much of the following information as possible:
Wayspot Title: Achain - statue st Nicolas
Location (lat/lon): LAT 48.917936 LONG 6.575036
City: Achain
Country: France
Screenshot of the Rejection Email (do not include your personal information): n/a
Additional Information (if any): This wayspot is the new target of a local player or group of players requesting removal of other wayspots in the area around this place.
there is even a website about the artist’s project which created the current statue
there will be more statues added down the line
Also please note that this topic is only the last in date of a chain of removals
the last two other removals have been logged under
the current assumption is that there is someone playing the wayfarer system to maliciously remove the POI and we have no way of knowing who it is. I would suggest further inspection of the trail of evidence you might have in your systems.
But would one have to walk on the road? If so Niantic doesn’t consider that to be safe pedestrian access, hence my question. Yes pedestrians typically arrive on foot, but using what infrastructure? That is the question.
Just to note, the two previous appeals to reinstate the wayspots both failed, so there does not seem to be evidence of anyone maliciously removing valid wayspots.
Big LOL - a very big LOL.
Look at the streetview images, when this isnt a place to discover, then I really dont know. And it looks more than safe guys.
It’s getting ridiculous how many good waypoints are being reported away here, and every little hiking trail sign is being submitted and accepted. The quality is really declining more and more in terms of good wayspots.
In my opinion, this wayspot is great and invites PoGo and Ingress players to discover it. And before someone asks, yes, I believe that wayspots are being deliberately reported away by players who don’t play fair.
The pin is not on the road. It isn’t even on the broad verge that you can see from space. It seems to be on a path that can be seen in the inset as a light-colored line roughly parallel to the road and leading to a copse of trees.
As Wayfarer is all about exploring the world on foot it doesn’t seem at all correct to insist upon having a parking lot at every point of interest. Rather, it should require evidence that one cannot approach the point safely to reject it.
It must be possible to reach that broad field and path or they would not be there. One would have to prove that pedestrians, equestrians and bicyclists were all banned from the area to assert it was unreachable.
You’d still be left wondering how and why the artist placed a heavy statue in such a manner. Perhaps they chartered a helicopter?
I think it’s very difficult for Wayfarers to grapple with understanding of how to handle Wayspots near roads that may require use of shared roadspace, driving to them, or other situations similar. Niantic has done a poor job at explaining expectations, but in part I think they don’t want to set themselves up for too much “laywering” back and forth and finding technicalities that people get hung up on and might wind up unintentionally supporting an unsafe location that causes harm. In reality, lack of clarity only causes more in-fighting.
From what I see, I’d consider this to be a safe location, but probably a 3* or 4* on the old review system. It’s clear visitors are intended or at least able to walk around the site. It would be nice if there was a better parking area to separate visitors, but it’s good enough for locals and I suspect they already expect photographers to be preoccupied with their phones while visiting.
For me, it’s not clear that visitors are intended to walk around. It seems as though this just might be a roadside attraction that you can see as you drive by. It’s not a park. There’s no place to park and there’s no trails or sidewalks or any other foot path going to it. I’m not saying I’m 100% voted against it all I’m saying is there no evidence of safe pedestrian access based on what the current guidance is.
I understand your concerns, really, even if we argue different sides. I know I’ve submitted similar but I’ve also reported similar for removal.
It also doesn’t help that in lack of guidance, it ends up debated in appeals and we’re left to assume that whatever they say is categorical which we know is so helpful
