Wayfarer Test Concern
I don't remember this question but I've seen it come up a lot, most recently by our banned friend.
Wayfarer test for the basket question is a 3 star because it's not on the object but on the screen and a considerable distance away from the unique architecture. A roundabout scuplture having a portal on the adjacent sidewalks is allowed a portal as a 3 star per the test...
Is this true? The correct answer the test is telling them to use is 3* for location if an object has no pedestrian access but the pin is placed on a nearby sidewalk?
@NianticCasey if this is true this is giving our more bad faith actors the wrong impression and something to back themselves up when they spread it to new submitters/reviewers.
What would our "friend" know? He bought his L12 accounts that already passed the exam...
He has PoGo accounts and is not the only one I've heard this from.
I actually had that test question and answered it as 1-star. I've seen so many examples of that very scenario in Appeals multiple times and Niantic has always sided with removal. So I'm not sure where he is getting that 3-star is the correct answer unless he is deliberately spreading false information.
Yeah I'm having a hard time understanding how they know it's the correct answer but as I've said I've seen this brought up in other places. TimerCIock bringing it up as supporting evidence made me finally make this post because for some reason people are really certain this supports the idea you can place a marker anywhere safe even if the object isn't.
I'm not sure these when these tests were created but could it be possible that it was prior to our current understanding of pedestrian access? I wanted to bring it up if they are actually taking feedback about our concerns and looking to make changes.
My biggest complaint with pin placement is submitting from where the photo was taken and not on the object or even close. Personally I think it would be helpful to add mention properly placing the pin. That parking lot seems way too far from the object
Such wayspots should be removed because of the lack of pedestrian access.
But if I remember right, that question specifically asks how you'd rate the accuracy. So although it is not a valid wayspot (because there's no pedestrian access), it doesn't warrant a 1* in location: you can still see the object.
I think that's a misleading question then because it shouldn't be rated based on accuracy, the whole nomination should be rejected outright. This is what brand new reviewers are seeing and learning from. Giving them a question where the real correct way to rate isn't an option doesn't make any sense.
It might be intentional, to test whether the user has understood that sections should be rated separately. 1* in Safe Access category doesn't mean that it's also 1* in Location Accuracy.
But yes, if rated properly that nomination should've already been rejected as 1*, for having no pedestrian access. So the user rating it shouldn't need to rate the location accuracy at all. It does read like a trick question that has no right answer.
Sorry I made an edit. But yeah I think it's a problem question to give new people a question that isn't applicable when doing a real review.
Disagree with you there. ingress players like myself have been doing this over all platforms for a few years. Pogo players are not just reviewing for pogo so they need to do what we have done no matter if it affects there gameplay or not.
Tell them to watch the video read what's eligible and not and read what's being asked. Then review
If the official test they're taking is having them use a rating that wouldn't be applicable when actually reviewing, that's a problem. Unless we are all wrong and should never 1* pedestrian access in the first catagory.
I think the basket one is this :
Yes, the answer is 3* but the basket is a huge and tall monument and on satellite view the pin will probably be in front of it.
also that is a sidewalk and it is not in the middle of the circle so the pedestrian access 1* does not apply. If anyone wants to look it up it is called Longaberger and is located in Newark Ohio. That is a sidewalk that leads up to the building don't get why people are saying no pedestrian access?
I think the person was questioning how far it is from the real location to receive a 3* , not the sidewalk example.
Found this on another community. Seems like the issue is a mixture of two of the test questions. It's not as bad as I initially thought but it's still a pretty weird question/answer choice if you want people to reject such cases.
As you know, all candidates need to have pedestrian access in order to be eligible. There are two questions on the qualification exam related to location:
1. Location Accuracy, which looks at whether the marker is on the object in question. The guidelines for this section mention "Rate 1 star if the nomination cannot be found, 3 stars if likely to exist but is obscured, or 5 stars if found and accurate." So if the marker is away from the actual object but can be viewed/verified in Maps, it should be 3 starred.
2. Safe Access, which asks "Does it appear to be safely accessible for pedestrians?" In case of a roundabout with no pedestrian access, you would one-star this question. You could also scroll up to the "Should this be a Wayspot?" question, one-star and select Location >> Pedestrian Access in this case.
Hope that helps!
But in the case of the Locomotora question, the object is in a roundabout with no safe access and the marker is on a sidewalk away from the object.
The question is asking location accuracy but in a review we should be rejecting it in the Should this be a wayspot? Section for 1* pedestrian access.
My concern is why use an example of something that should be rejected for a question on location accuracy.
You could also scroll up to the "Should this be a Wayspot?" question, one-star and select Location >> Pedestrian Access in this case.
Interesting, This part is the exact opposite of what He Who Must Not Be Named has said multiple times on the Wayfarer subreddit.
Ah! I see what you're saying @Kliffington, good point. I'll bring that feedback back to the team to see if we can find a better example for that question.
Thank you! I'm glad I made sense, I was beginning to question myself!
Just to go back to the original question, shouldn't correcting the location be an answer choice?
Yeah I just saw, he's at it again https://www.reddit.com/r/NianticWayfarer/comments/e8sat7/wayfarer_test_allows_a_3_star_to_be_pretty_far/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share
It's what prompted me to ask @NianticCasey about adding it to the answer choices. TC claims that because "Suggest a new location" isn't an answer choice, reviewers who click on it to suggest a more accurate location are engaged in abuse.
Pardon my ICAO, but...
Whiskey, Tango, Alfa, Foxtrot, interrogative.
@NianticCasey here is yet another odd test question that should be rejected for pedestrian access or moved. I know you can't tell us how these are determined but they really should be reviewed. I also saw someone talking about how there was a question about a Historical Home that is still a private residence but is currently a wayspot. It's confusing and conflicting