Most bogus reasons for Portal Denials?
I would like a place to vent and for others to vent about the most ridiculous reasons for their submissions being denied.
I had one, which was a sign at a boat launch, denied because the photo was "low quality". Even though the sign was in focus, very readable, well-lit, and taken during the day time.
I had a village hall/office denied because "the real world location could not be found", despite the fact it is on a main road with street view.
The more I think about it, the more I am convinced there are players in different areas who use Wayfarer simply as another avenue with which to mess with opponents, by coming up with dumb reasons to get perfectly good candidates denied.
1
Comments
Please consider that the reject reasons are not at all expansive enough to give precise messages to the submitter. Take a second look at your rejects and see if there is anything you can improve.
If your nomination was older than when rejection reasons began showing, bear in mind that not everyone took the time to pick an accurate rejection reason because the outcome was the same regardless.
It does matter for the reasons of why a portal has been rejected.
As you can see this has been rejected and FLAGED as abuse, harassment etc.
I've was suspended and I'm guessing its ridiculous and bad reviewing that has caused me problems in the past.
@NianticBrian @NianticCasey what is going to be done by this abuse of the system.
My nomination is of a more than acceptable trail marker and nothing abusive in the text or picture.
This sort of lazy reviewers should be banned
Got the link to the picture of the sub as ive reviewed some London Loop ones and rejected a couple
Yes I do and why do you reject them.
The ones I had were all location mismatch, either in the middle of the road and couldnt find the correct location, or completely mismatched locations with the title saying one name, the pin being on a different street.
The last one I had, which was why I asked to see the picture, was of a sign that was apparently near a tree, however then pin was placed in the middle of two house driveways on a road with no trees anywhere near
Mine was on a road but not in the middle of the road which is on a lamp post.
But what I dont like is that lazy uneducated reviewers will mark the portal incorrectly for rejection which could possibly cause problems for me in the future.
As I say its something that niantic need to sort out and punish people for abuse of wayfarer
For a painted newspaper box and a small open-air stage at a park: "The real-world location of the Candidate appears to represent a generic store or restaurant."
I think a partial fix to these bogus submission rejection reasons is to force a text response sent to niantic. If they get the same letter or phrase posted multiple times it should flag for a cool down. Right now people are just pushing random 1* reasons to avoid a cool down. Getting a natural feature on a permanent concrete imprint tonight shows people send in bogus responses it would also help deal with the presets in OPR/Wayfarer tools some agents use to vote. I wonder sometimes if some people are still speed voting for onyx recon to level to 16.
I had a monarch waystation (an interesting man-assisted garden for butterflies) in a public park rejected for, quote, "abuse, trolling, or harassment", and "low quality photo".
This was the photo.
This was the description.
So figure that one out.
Also, like OP, I also had a sign in a park rejected for "low quality" despite the whole thing being in focus and readable. Hard not to think you're being messed with.
Sometimes in wayfarer photos are being flipped on their side due to some bug. This can cause a photo denial.
I've had a Sports Field Marked as a Generic Business or a Season Display. - Cricket Fields are actually concrete in the middle of an oval. The mind Boggles at some of the 1* reasons
Outdoor sports fields occasionally get marked as seasonal over here in Nordic because some reviewers insist that they 'stop being sports fields' during the snow season. Not an argument that I buy personally. They were zoned for sports, they don't cease to be sports fields when the weather turns to worse.
Its more interesting that this is a government park - and cricket is an all year sport in australia. - Ive had Murals outside shops be Private Residential as well. Some reviewers just want the easy 1*'s
I had a lighthouse on an island with a population of about 2000 people denied for "The real-world location of the Candidate appears to represent a generic store or restaurant". I've had community centres rejected for the same reason.
A community college I visit has the Olympic pool, and scoreboard used by Michael Phelps to qualify for the 2004 Olympics. Denied because it's a seasonal/temporary display.
I mean... I guess it is technically portable, but if he hasn't asked for it back yet...
Just had a protected +120 yeard old building, converted to offices from the Town Council rejected for K-12 and for obstructing emergency services. There are offices from the council, not a kindergarten inside a fire station. Resubmitted.
Here is a fresh one:
This is a the submission photo: http://lh3.googleusercontent.com/8ivBzydL_28nr2XdbiiprdjBasKF5wKsg6q8N8dlNTHtrURVW-PD4-_geTVKU-gtwsbz94NvRwSS1niP9qf61ZO3LCg
but where's the kitchen!?
Have had a dog exercise area in a park turned down *twice* as a generic store/restaurant. 🤦♂️
I am almost steadfast in thinking it is someone randomizing it to get around cool downs and speed voting. All these generic business seem too common and it could very well be people trying to speed vote to get the onyx badge or don't want new portals in areas.
What if people are thinking "no, this too generic like generic corporate art or generic traffic signs", but this is the closest they got? Anyhow, I think the reject reasons need expanding.
Doesn't Meet Criteria.
It requires to enter a reason why it does not meet criteria. And peoples are lazy. They'll prefer to click on "Generic business" meaning "too generic".
Add a one-click reason "Common object - no historical value or visual uniqueness" and it'll be most popular reject reason.
Amazing how pointing out the most likely cause for this with older nominations is somehow disagreeable, as if I'm supporting the laziness 🙄
I had the most iconic and largest war memorial in my state rejected for no reason. The Shrine of Remembrance is HUGE! It was a joke that it got rejected. I resubmitted it and it went through
How do you know that 'the outcome was the same regardless'? It seems more likely to me that some rejection categories carry more weight. Such as 'Obstructs Emergency Services' and 'License Plate'. Not to mention that it might've affected the OPR bans.
I've had a sports track rejected for a bogus 'visible license plate'. No vehicles in sight (not even in the photosphere), extremely unlikely that more than one reviewer chose that reason. Yet it was the only reason cited for the rejection.
I just had a new playground - a somewhat unusual glass climbing one on a new boardwalk - rejected for being a 'generic business or restaurant' and 'seasonal'. Of all the things I've submitted it seemed one of the best ones for checking every 5 star box except visibility since it's new (though the supporting picture also gave some pretty good confirming details).
A long-term reviewer here said he's suddenly gone into red in Wayfarer and doesn't know why, and tbh I'm starting to worry that people doing bad reviews have achieved a critical mass and are weighing agreements in that way.
I think it is time they rethink how many 1* rejections are needed to sink a submission if it takes less 1* for denials than 2-5* for approvals there is a chance it could be abused. If people aren't voting properly and randomly chose certain 1* if it takes so few to reject a waypoint false rejections could happen by a small amount of players gaming the system