Is there really any reason why we cannot appeal submissions? I have example why.......
edited March 2020 in Wayfarer (Archive)
I submitted a tennis backboard wall for practicing. I got a reject of tilted photo, temporary and seasonal. I have photospheric evidence it exists, it is not a duplicate. I even submitted supporting documentation as to why it is important. I had to wait a month to be told obvious false information as to why it is invalid. Clearly either some are not reading the rules or I suspect revenge voting or gate keeping.
I am just trying understand why?
This discussion has been closed.
I wish we could appeal submissions, but Niantic would be overwhelmed with almost every rejected submission. I can see why they don’t allow people to do it.
While we as players know that it would be difficult and time consuming process to appeal nominations like this. I believe there has to be a way for players to report/appeal really bad denials. The above example by @kholman1 really shows that there is abuse at play. There is zero reason for this nomination to be rejected. The primary rejection reason was "Photo Orientation" the primary submitted photo is perfectly fine.
I believe a lot of us would be even willing to spend an upgrade to appeal a rejection to mitigate further reviewer abuse and get a definite answer from NianticOps directly. A lot of has had perfectly fine nominations rejected for very poor reasons, such as no sidewalk even with a sidewalk in the photo. There is only so many times we can resubmit and upgrade a nomination.
I know the static advice is take a better photo or better description but when a player does all that and crosses every T and dots every I on a submission and its still denied what are they to do?
Appeals should require heavy evidence of the nominations location and details to allow a full easy review for the new appeal reviewer.
@NianticCasey Can you look at this and give your thoughts. I know you are very busy but matters like this are why we lose very good nominators and reviewers due to rejection fatigue.
As you can see the nominator was meticulous with a perfect nomination. Its at a park, safely accessible, provided incredible details.
I checked the satellite view and Intel and don't see any problems with this nomination.
I got a church rejected. Street map updated, so I dont know, I will just submit again with the same pictures lol. Some gazebos are duplicated with playgrounds, anyway, there should be a way to report that, bad reviewers.
What's that popular saying? That people seem to love throwing around? It's not visually unique or historic?
It's a block wall, and the tennis courts are clearly eligible and easier to get approved, submit them?
Or that other popular one, it's too close to others and wasn't on the poi to be approved?
Probably is going to be one of those situations.
I do feel a special upgrade for appeals is a great idea. Maybe every 100 agreements one is also earned would be fair for Niantic to review an appeal.
Sorry but I'll be honest, if i saw that the most id give it is 2* because when all is said and done, its a wall.
Completely agree with @Dice976jr , can't see why you would submit a wall, when the courts themselves are a perfectly valid submission.
You can appeal by trying again.
As Theisman said, its just a wall. The tennis field might get approved, but just this wall? Its like trying to submiting both the goals of a soccer field... That wall is just part of the whole set.
@Hydraulinski @Theisman I did not mention I submitted the courts 3 times. They were duplicated. There is two distinct sets of 2 court pairs. Duplicated each time. The wall itself should be allowed to submit in this case and not the court since the reviewers won't even read the guidelines.
This is not a tennis center it is two sets of courts in a very large city park. There is two basketball courts and two sets of court enclosures. The second was duplicated 3 times and clearly the wall isn't just a wall as you can see it is only on section of the set keep getting rejected.
Keep trying. Put numbers on them, that might help.
I just wen to a park yesterday and found out that there is 10 shrines with diferent art on display, but only two got approved and both with several pictures from the others shrines. The reviews sometimes can't tell the difference while reviweing and duplicates happen where they shouldn't. now I have 8 more submissions to make there, but i'm putting numbers at each one.
I did that even tried practice courts for set number two. The reviewers don't listen. They approved an edit to add #1 to the existing but yet keep duplicating. It is really a case of not even reading past seeing a tennis court in checking for duplicates and smashing duplicate. I only posted this thread as I feel I am at my whits end with this. I have tried 4 times and a valid poi is being denied.
1 wall is fine to people? Seriously?
I linked it to Tennis Backboards are actually a thing not just a wall. So are people being that dense? It should be one or the other not forcing a tennis court? Niantic has stated don't partition playgrounds but they haven't specifically said you cannot do a visually distinct part of the area as a submission. So if someone sends in the swings it can be valid but if they try do the jungle gym etc. everything else it is a duplicate.
This is a horrible submission. Stop getting this guy's hope up by telling him to keep trying. It's a wall. It's not eligible. The courts themselves are what should be submitted.
If you named it a handball court, you might have more grounds. Cities have well known handball courts that are over 50s old.
Some are even confirmed in movies.
I'm deeply concerned that somehow photo orientation and temporary or seasonal display were used. I love getting feedback on rejections, but it won't be useful in situations like this. I almost feel like a nomination upgraded should also allow a direct response from Niantic with specific insight and or clarification, since upgrades are obviously only being rewarded to those who review.
The photo is of excellent quality with a minor tilt simply because a human took the picture. It is as temporary or seasonal as any outdoor athletic equipment.
Its purpose is to promote athleticism and provide a place to warm up or play tennis or maybe even racquetball. While it may not have the same cultural significance of a tennis court itself, it holds little difference than a batting cage or similar equipment.
First off the courts were submitted 3 times only to be duplicated and second the support info linked to what it is. Just because the photo has a very slight tilt and was taken in the rain does not disqualify it. To say this is horrible isn't even fair. I have seen a lot worse than this pass. I think part of the issue is some reviewers are having too high standards. Niantic isn't looking for perfection but they also don't want just anything. A tennis backboard hitting wall would be just as valid as the court but if both were submitted only one or the other should be approved not both. This is part of the issue I am seeing people aren't looking at the bigger picture. You can frame certain things different ways they still lead to the same route just because the courts were not submitted do no pass harsh judgment which is what I am seeing happen. So if someone were to submit say a slide at the playground the disqualifies any future submission at said playground it then will become a duplicate. The new guidance does say structure but some cases we only have a slide etc. The issue is sending in multiple individual pieces not submitted the group or focusing on a subsection of the group for the submission and only submitting one object to represent the group.
So not only is it just a wall, it is literally part of the pair of tennis courts that are already a portal.
This is getting slightly off-topic with a focus on what was rejected.I believe the real question is why can't appeals be an option. I think as previously stated in this thread, the sheer volume of rejections that would be appealed would be overwhelming. If there were ever appeals offered for reviewing expect to have to review significantly more than 100 to get it.
The satellite view shows they are 2 entirely separate courts and are not connected. Each individual separated court can be its own Waypoint. Second the wall would be more unique than the actual court as not all Tennis Courts/Tennis areas have a solo play wall like this. Normally Tennis courts are just fences on all sides. This one has fences then a specific spot for the Tennis Wall for solo practice.
What's Casey's comment going to say? It has to be architecture or art or have a sign? I guess the real question is this architecture? Because I see no art or signage. If this is allowed than the mausoleums should have a higher vote as it has 4 walls and a roof with memorial plaques and history.
@NianticCasey. Can we get a are you serious option? Like, insightful and disagree really doesn't cut it for this one.
I'm still cracking up this was submitted and reviewed on. A wall????
Well, soccer fields and the tennis court are nothing else but floor. So why not a wall? It's not just a wass, but a specifically one for the game.
OP can mix the court and the wall in one portal so everyone would be happy. Name it Training Walled Tennis Court.
The end of your comment is what's allowed. "Tennis court". The other is insignificant as it is a wall for the surroundings. What's next a fence?
Once again go look at the actual park the portal is at the gate to the west set of courts. That should not even be an issue. This is two individually fenced areas. Not 4 courts sharing the same fencing. It should qualify under the multiples rule as they don't share a common sign and are not part of a tennis center. Clearly from the responses I am getting people in here couldn't even bother giving the submitter a benefit of the doubt when valid evidence is given. This is not a duplicate submission nor is it just a wall.
I'm not in disagreement on the tennis courts aren't eligible. A clarification would eliminate that issue. But a blank wall is a blank wall. A fence is a fence. If they had something artistic on them, maybe... if they had a sign it would be eligible under the signs of existing wayspots. But a blank wall? Next you'll be saying the sky is blue and we need a sky wayspot.
Now does Niantic deem multiple portals are allowed for this? Is it 2 portals? Is it 4 portals? Or is it just 1 portal? What's niantic's opinion on how many is too many? I guess is what you are looking for clarification on being frustrated with rejections?
So, should OP repurpose the complaint and say they would like to appeal false duplicates, as almost everyone in here has been in agreement that the second tennis court is eligible on its own?
I see the wall as something similar to a slide attached to a playset. You could nominate the whole playset, but sometimes it's nice just to have the slide as the portal for something a little different. The playset, if later submitted, should be a duplicate if it is attached equipment. This person nominated the wall as it offered more unique distinction than the nearby (but separate) tennis court.