Oh, please tell, that you describe all children playgrounds with 500-word text.
Don’t need to exaggerate about description of… cross. It’s cross. And sadly, nothing else in suburb is valid sometimes to nominate, and I’m a bit tired of all them named just “Cross” with no signification even where or which is it.
And by the “you wouldn’t understand it”. Well, gladly nominations are visible just within certain distance, and where I submit them there is no need to clarify what is cross and why it’s submitted.
I wonder if the best course of action for you is to try and understand and take the advice being offered or double down that “cross, cross, cross” is acceptable when clearly it is not?
I never said you needed 500 words. You could describe a playground in a single sentence and it would still be much better than “feel the force”. The cross you’re submitting isn’t from a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away for a start.
Hey, 1. can I please ask you to stay respectful to the people giving correct advice? and 2. have you considered that correlation was not causation, and just because a nomination with a specific word in it was rejected doesn’t mean that there is automatically a hard filter against that word? I assure you the community would have noticed.
It was 3rd on the list of what the photo was about. As the text didn’t elaborate that it was of religious significance- not all cross shapes are - Emily presummably said it was unlikely to meet criteria.
The human reviewer specified that This cross from the evidence given did not meet acceptablity criteria.
You need to take onboard that feedback and the feedback freely provided and change your approach or else you are likely just to have more frustration.
I think that a title such as Georgian Cross - and something that makes it unique eg specific location or if there is something else about that particular cross that makes it distinctive.
I think that your description should refer to it as a religious object that people may stop and pray at would helpful. I presume you would be submitting under exploration criteria so why would someone go to this cross.
Supplementary needs to perhaps say more about why they are made this way - local community that sort of thing. And with supplementary photo and text you should show clearly evidence of where it is and that sort of property it is on and safe to access.
It is the sort of basics we are all expected to do.
And it doesn’t guarantee smooth passage as we all will get caught by Emily sometimes
So if I will describe with all that information all my rejections now, and then will get same reject on all my submissions by Emily, should I continue in this topic or start new?
For what it’s worth, I’ve had a couple crosses accepted, although they were attached to churches and not free standing sculptures, so to speak. I put them in the categories of “religious sculpture” and “cross” - my descriptions did contain the church name they were associated with, and they were uplighted, so that probably helped. I even had a unique church bell tower accepted, although I think was an exception, not the rule. It had brick cut-outs of crosses on the bell tower, which is a unique architecture.
I would actually love to see you post here to let us know whether the suggestions given work or not. I do know that the ML (machine learning ai) model has trouble separating out background in a photo. I think that a closer focus might help some of these - not so close that it can’t detect the context of the environment. For that first one, I might try a crop like this for the main photo:
I always take my photos first, then usually crop the main photo to square to get the best proportions for how the game uses the photos, unless a square photo looks bad for the point of interest I am submitting. See if a photo like that gets past the “automated process.”
For the text, I agree with making it clear what you are submitting. I wouldn’t have known that wasn’t just a power pole of some kind if you hadn’t told me. Some reviewers may have even rejected this thinking that “stop” was a game reference in the description.
”You know what to do” sounds like influencing voters, which is also a rejection reason. I just put whatever extra information that I did not include in the description in the supporting section that reveiwers need to know in order to accept my nomination. Something like, “Meets exploration criteria. Can be seen on Street View.”
So after all that discussion and suggestions, you are saying, that no matter what I will do, if nothing will be accepted-it’s just “well, that happens, try to figure out yourself what’s wrong”?
