Portal Rejection Abuse and Suggestion for Improvement of Nomination Process

Are there any steps to prevent wrong rejection or abuse of rejection of perfectly valid portals? For example, churches (or places of worship) should be a five-star rated portal. However, I've have already two church submissions rejected. These are places of worship people can come over (open to the public) and can be seen in streetview.

Is there a plan for the wrong or apparent abuse of the review process?

For improvement, can we include more of a category rather than broad appeal statements be included in the nomination process?

Comments

  • JudyBJudyB ✭✭✭

    There are two sets of reasons for which submissions might be rejected:

    • The portal is a duplicate of an existing process, or is too close to an existing portal
    • The submission itself wasn't good enough

    If your portals are rejected as duplicates or "too close" and you think that is wrong, then you should recheck the location you used - it's possible that you accidentally got the location wrong.

    If the submission wasn't "good enough" then there are many valid reasons why your submission might be rejected: photo includes people or car registration plates, photo was too dark, the location could not be confirmed, your description was "bad". For example, if reviewers thought your description or photo was taken from the Internet then it would be rejected.

    If reviewers cannot confirm the location on Google maps then they should mark the location as 3*, but I have heard suggestions that if all reviewers do this then the portal will be rejected. Note that I have no idea if this is actually true. I have reviewed churches for which it was very difficult to confirm the location, although in general you should b

  • RebilanderRebilander ✭✭✭

    I actually already have an onyx badge for recon, with over 14,000 portals analyzed and processed. Factors that lead to a portal approval ins't new to me. Sorry for not putting more context. For what I have submitted, the photo is a clear view of the church facade (I don't know if there is any other way to take better photos of a church than it's facade; There are also no people since it wasn't a busy day) with its name clearly visible in the shot. The portal title - very specific with its city location in the title. The church is available and can be seen in street view. For the description, I did at least three sentences describing what it was, including the congregation of the church-goers. I've been so meticulous in my submissions, spending quite time in each one.

    My assumption that it was rejected due to abuse is because of its location. I'm the only agent in the city, located in a cape (You know how strategic these portals can be if approved).

    Anyways, perhaps before we can rule out abuse is for Niantic to include WHY a candidate was rejected, or at least the comments included in the review so we can do better.

Sign In or Register to comment.