Hello! If it’s alright, I’d like to ask for everyone’s input about this particular nomination. It was one of few that I was able to have pass the automated review, but was rejected by human reviewers for the reasons shown in the image. I believe it was in the voting phase for about 11 days.
I really only want to take in everyone’s viewpoint on
- what is good about the nomination
- what is bad about the nomination
- why the reason for rejection occurred and if that reason itself is valid in your opinion
- suggestions for improvements
so I won’t be trying to defend anything in this thread and aim to see what people think just by looking for themselves. But if you would like any clarification on specifics related to the wayspot, I’d be more than happy to try and elaborate.
Thanks in advance! Hoping to learn from this, as I’ve had a string of long rejections and I’m wanting to know what may be the right direction.
The images show a padlocked gate, not a great sign of a safe location…
Guessing this isn’t the walking entrance, images of the actual used entrance should give you more of a chance.
Good luck.
I have had both rejections and acceptances for unsigned trails using the gate keeping unauthorized vehicles from entering as the focal point. I think it was rejected because of all the warning markers, and the lack of evidence that it is an actual trail. When I did a Google search, I saw several sources you could link in the supporting section to prove this is a trailhead.
I think I would either resubmit or appeal this rejection with the evidence of a trail. If you do resubmit, i would recommend that the new main photo be taken from just a step or two back, so it looks more like a gate and less like a complete barrier. And the supporting from quite a bit back so that the access shows. Just a mock up from street view:
Definitely show that sidewalk and give a link to show that this isn’t just where the road stops for now.
Thanks, that helps me understand what people see at a first glance. I can definitely improve that aspect of this.
Appreciate it!
Thank you for the extensive advice! I’m glad what you thought after a little digging into the location, and I appreciate you sharing your own experiences with similar submissions.
I’ll make sure I note down your advice for my next attempt!
An access point to a trail that has no distinguishing features is going to be a hard sell. Certainly the image you used is a negative one, and when the image does that at the outset, you’ve lost the reviewers immediately.
Imagine you took a photo just beyond the barrier. This would just be a random stretch of path in random surroundings, and it will not say “a great place to exercise”. From in front of the barrier, you have exactly the same place, but with extra negatives.
However, if named trails start from this point and you can prove this in the supporting information, you might get accepted. As long as you’ve got a photo that doesn’t immediately put people off. which isn’t that easy here.
Thanks, it’s great to hear more input focused on the photo. I agree with you on that it’s the first thing reviewers see, assuming Emily gives it the go ahead. I like hearing more about different perspectives like this on images in particular, so much appreciated!
I suspect, without much specific evidence, that a lot of reviews are decided as soon as the reviewer sees the photo.
This means that borderline submissions (which I think this will never get beyond), need a tight photo that sings to the reviewers.
Looks to me like the gate is there because it is the walking entrance and they want to keep vehicles out, or limit vehicles to official ones needed to maintain the trail.
You are correct but the images do not let that stand out. To me it looks like a road and a pavement that stops.
The Red signs shout to me “This is as far as you go”.
This is probably a localised issue as in the UK Red signs are usually saying “No” or “Danger”.
If I was nominating something like this in the UK I would try to go beyond the red signs and show the actual trail.
My thoughts on Trails are known so I would have probably skipped this but if I was forced then no definitive trail shown, no trail name, No trail name sign i would struggle to Accept.
If I accepted that there is a path here I would see it (with UK eyes) what I see a lot in reviews of a general “Public Footpaths” where they add the description of “Follow this path to get to Trails, Coast, Shopping area” as in it is leading to possible waypoints but not a waypoint in itself.
Just My Opinion
I value your input, but this absolutely is “an American thing.” This is a very common sight for trails that start from a road to indicate that cars are prohibited past this point. If you look at the map, this trail is clearly marked on Google.
I saw some confusion on the topic of trails, so I’m hoping to provide a bit more info generally on that to the best of my knowledge.
SlimboyFat71, that’s interesting to hear about the differences of trails in the UK, so thanks for sharing your opinion on that.
seaprincesshnb is right in saying that trails marked like this are for preventing vehicles specifically, and I actually want to point out the small reflectors on red diamond itself. Those are there for cars to be able to see at night when it’s pitch black so they know not to continue further down roads like this one. If you see stuff like that in future submissions, that’s basically the best way to tell what’s going on. I’ve attached the photo itself for a better look at that sign on it.
As for the trail not having a defined path, I don’t know if that’s common in other places but it’s super common here in Florida. A lot of hiking trails are made from just cutting down trees in a path from one point to another. They may thin the grass into a dirt path sometimes, but the clearing itself indicates that it’s meant to be walked unless otherwise specified by a sign or notice posted somewhere. There’s a lot of the “preservation” mentality for natural areas in our state, and you’ll often see neighborhoods being built inside of former forests, grasslands, or wetlands in a way that preserves the wildlife of that area. As a result, you’ll have wildlife living alongside people and their homes (which is always interesting). This neighborhood in particular is somewhat like that, as the houses and roads were built around preexisting natural landforms and bodies of water. The long lake in the middle was actually dug out to add more places for our gators to live in, and it was stocked with fish as well which led to it being popular for the neighborhood kids to hang out and fish at over the years.
Thanks for this opportunity to share a bit about my area. Our state may be known for its weirdos and some additionally unfortunate political issues, but it’s a beautiful place with a lot of natural atmosphere that most people care to preserve.
