# In your opinion, did this historic plaque deserve not to be accepted? **URL:** \ **Category:** Nomination Support\ **Created:** [January 14, 2026, 11:54am UTC](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/t/in-your-opinion-did-this-historic-plaque-deserve-not-to-be-accepted/110967 "2026-01-14T11:54:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Pex988](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/da6949/32.png) [@Pex988](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/u/Pex988)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2026, 11:54am UTC](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/t/in-your-opinion-did-this-historic-plaque-deserve-not-to-be-accepted/110967/1 "2026-01-14T11:54:26Z")
#### Proposta di Wayspot per Targa Storica Gemellaggio Genzano-Merseburg (R.D.T.) Genzano di Roma RM Non accettate 2025-12-30 ##### I revisori hanno fornito questi motivi principali per non aver accettato questa proposta: - La proposta è probabilmente non permanente o distinta - La proposta è priva di unicità o di significato culturale e storico ![](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/wayfarer/original/3X/9/5/95f09101eb093fbd0b858c9ed1bdc8ec5f46f804.jpeg) ##### Descrizione La targa è di particolare interesse storico poiché cita espressamente la R.D.T. (Repubblica Democratica Tedesca o Germania Est), testimoniando i legami internazionali e gli scambi culturali intrapresi durante il periodo della Guerra Fredda. Nonostante sulla targa sia riportato il nome “Melseburg” (probabile refuso dell’epoca), il riferimento è alla città sassone di Merseburg, con cui Genzano mantiene un legame di amicizia da oltre 50 anni. ##### Posizione Via Melseburg, 31, 00045 Genzano di Roma RM, Italia ##### Informazioni supplementari ![](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/wayfarer/original/3X/d/b/db3f9224b472b6ac391dba207163e22cd34d09b7.jpeg) la targa è un elemento fisso e permanente, unico nel suo genere nel contesto della via, e soddisfa i criteri di “esplorazione” e “luogo di importanza storica locale”. ---
**Author:** ![salixsorbus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@salixsorbus](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/u/salixsorbus)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2026, 12:17pm UTC](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/t/in-your-opinion-did-this-historic-plaque-deserve-not-to-be-accepted/110967/2 "2026-01-14T12:17:33Z")
This one is _just_ a road name sign. There are probably a lot of road name signs like this in this area. I wouldn’t spend further time on these. ---
**Author:** ![elijustrying](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/wayfarer/user_avatar/community.wayfarer.scopely.com/elijustrying/32/25162_2.png) [@elijustrying](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/u/elijustrying)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2026, 12:18pm UTC](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/t/in-your-opinion-did-this-historic-plaque-deserve-not-to-be-accepted/110967/3 "2026-01-14T12:18:50Z")
This does appear to be correctly rejected for not being distinct. It appears to be a standard format street sign. The fact that the street name may be derived from cultural links does not make it eligible. With this sign you need to demonstrate why someone would go and look at this sign and in my view get something educational from it. So if under the street name there was a reasonable amount of text about the cultural link and why that link specifically existed, then it might be acceptable. I can see there is a little text there but I cant actually read it. ---
**Author:** ![Pex988](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/da6949/32.png) [@Pex988](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/u/Pex988)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2026, 12:38pm UTC](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/t/in-your-opinion-did-this-historic-plaque-deserve-not-to-be-accepted/110967/4 "2026-01-14T12:38:54Z")
c’è scritto: Città della R.D.T. gemellata con Genzano. ---
**Author:** ![elijustrying](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/wayfarer/user_avatar/community.wayfarer.scopely.com/elijustrying/32/25162_2.png) [@elijustrying](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/u/elijustrying)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2026, 12:43pm UTC](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/t/in-your-opinion-did-this-historic-plaque-deserve-not-to-be-accepted/110967/5 "2026-01-14T12:43:47Z")
Thanks for that additional information. My view is that is not enough to stand out. We have several name signs that refer to twining. It would need more about why and when this was done on the sign - more like a commemorative stone marking an event. ---
**Author:** ![Pex988](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/da6949/32.png) [@Pex988](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/u/Pex988)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2026, 12:56pm UTC](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/t/in-your-opinion-did-this-historic-plaque-deserve-not-to-be-accepted/110967/6 "2026-01-14T12:56:25Z")
> [@Pex988](#): > > Melseburg In your opinion, can the fact that there is a mistake (since the city is called Merseburg and not Melseburg) make the candidacy interesting in some way? ---
**Author:** ![salixsorbus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@salixsorbus](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/u/salixsorbus)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2026, 1:00pm UTC](https://community.wayfarer.scopely.com/t/in-your-opinion-did-this-historic-plaque-deserve-not-to-be-accepted/110967/7 "2026-01-14T13:00:18Z")
No 🙂 I also only just noticed that you claimed this was an historical city twinning plaque. It isn’t - it is a road name sign that references the city twinning.