I am posting on behalf of a friend to inquire about a recent issue.
Recently, multiple bank PokéStops/Wayspots across Kaohsiung City and Tainan City in Taiwan were removed simultaneously. We would like to understand the official reasons behind these removals, as well as the possibility of having these Wayspots restored. I have also submitted numerous bank Wayspot nominations in Tainan City; if banks are considered ineligible, it will directly affect my upcoming submissions.
In Taiwan, most banks occupy portions of commercial buildings and are not located on single-family private residential property. Customers conducting business do not line up in queues in front of counters; instead, they take a number and wait in dedicated seating areas. During peak hours, wait times can reach at least 30 to 45 minutes before being called, which provides ample time and great opportunities for social interaction.
Under Taiwan’s high temperatures, these banks offer free air conditioning, seating areas, and restrooms, which are vital for players and the general public to avoid heat exhaustion. Unlike typical businesses that require a purchase to sit down, these banks offer accessible indoor resting spaces with virtually no barriers to entry. We hope the team can consider being more lenient with the criteria for banks.
Below are the details of three affected locations sent by my friend:
There is nothing about a bank that makes it eligible to be a wayspot. There would have to be something else there which meets criteria. Banks are social infrastructure, but this doesn’t make them worth exercising at, exploring or being social at.
Reviewers might have got used to seeing these in the game and therefore got used to accepting them as wayspots, and submitters might have got used to submitting them, but this just means the local players are creating their own rules. This is always risky, since you can’t create your own rules and expect to keep them.
It is indeed just as you described. Most submitters simply look at what has already been approved and then look for similar objects to nominate.
I have also been reporting painted utility boxes that have had their artwork removed or painted over, trying to reduce their numbers. In the early days of Ingress and Pokémon GO, massive numbers of them were submitted and accepted, but Pikmin Bloom players probably hate receiving postcards of utility boxes.
There are two main parts to the acceptance criteria: meeting the eligibility criteria and not triggering any rejection criteria. In fact, the very first item under rejection criteria states that the nomination must “fail to meet eligibility criteria.” I would like you to think carefully about what “eligibility criteria” actually means.
How should we judge whether a nomination meets eligibility? I always start by considering the current purpose of existence of that location.
A restaurant’s purpose is to offer good food and a space to gather and chat over a meal.
A park’s purpose is to provide a place to exercise with equipment or on a field, as well as benches in pavilions to sit and converse.
In Japan, signposts were erected along temple pilgrimage routes from the Edo period through the late 19th century. What were once simple directional markers are now preserved as historical landmarks.
By considering the original purpose for setup or preservation—the reason for its existence today—we can determine whether a location is truly ideal for “Socialization,” “Exercise,” or “Exploration.”
So, what is the purpose of a bank? It is a place for consumers and businesses to deposit money, a counter for investment services, and a place to secure loans for major purchases like homes or cars, or for business operations. Its operational purpose does not include providing a space for residents to rest or socialize.
Of course, there are exceptions—such as a bank headquarters with an attached art museum, a branch housed in a deeply historical building that itself holds value as a landmark, or one featuring truly unique architecture. In those cases, it may meet eligibility criteria. However, this does not mean every standard bank qualifies as a Wayspot. Some form of additional, qualifying merit is required to meet eligibility.
In any case, we may get an official response from the Wayfarer team staff explaining why such a mass removal was carried out. I would certainly love to hear their insight as well.
I think the original proliferation of bank nominations came from a bad translation of eligible things. I’m having trouble remembering the exact wording though. It would have been 2019 to 2022 or so.
Just wanted to share a thought: during my last visit to the Fukuoka City Museum, I realized that Japan preserves its historical artifacts and cultural heritage exceptionally well, and in great numbers. This is a huge advantage when nominating Wayspots, and it’s something Taiwan currently lacks. Fortunately, Tainan City still retains quite a few buildings and historical sites from the Japanese colonial era, which gives us some great Wayspots with genuine exploration value.
I think this is an example of cultural difference. While we don’t really think of banks as social opportunities, the original post indicates they do. Remember, people there approved them!
And we’re ignoring the actual question here. Were banks being ineligible (by American standards) considered so egregious that they were retroactively removed?
No, this is not an example of cultural difference. This is an example of a local area misunderstanding the rules (or the rules being badly translated) and choosing their own eligibility definition.
Banks are not social places. They do not exist to assist with being people social. You can be social while waiting for a bus, while queueing at the line in the supermarket, but that is not the purpose of those spaces and is not an intended side-effect.
The wayspots were removed because the POI (a bank) was blatantly not meeting eligibility.
I agree with you in the context of Wayfarer, but for many people a bank (in a busy area) is a more social place than pavilions, community courtyards, etc just because there’re always people when it’s open.
There’s a big disconnect what’s “great”/“distinct”/“permanent” for Wayfarer and for normal people. Sorry if this sounds rude but some highly experienced Wayspotters are too indulged in Wayfarer speak that they forget what those terms mean for newcomers. Most people wouldn’t call a trail marker “distinct”, for example.
Isn’t this true in most countries? I happen to think it is ridiculous to consider postboxes as a great place to explore. Yet, the UK community has convinced themselves that they are. In Australia we see the survey markers, the US neighbourhood signs, in The Netherlands mosaic tiles, in Germany street signs if they mention something about the person the street is named after.
None of these examples I would ever consider something I would like to explore, yet the community seems to have a different opinion.
Probably now with the global community being able to report wayspots from a long distance, we will see a real change towards more global standards.
I think I do prefer the global standards, as long as we use the same standards everywhere.
I do agree in principle but I have not seen any argument (at least that makes sense to my UK brain) for banks.
Being from the UK I can only really speak about the Post Boxes with the argument that it is the Royal Cypher that adorns each post box that meats the “Explore” criteria. The early ones are rare and there are people that will “hunt” them including websites dedicated to them.
I am conflicted with the US Neighbourhood Signs. In the UK we have signs as you enter a Village and as long is isn’t the normal “Letters on a metal back” type sign they do get accepted. I can only assume it’s the amounts. UK Village 1 or 2, US neighbourhood every entry point both sides of the roads making a lot of reviewers reject as “Not Distinct”.
Taiwan has plently of sites worthy of exploration that aren’t remnants of Japanese imperialism. I’m not sure if that’s what you were implying but it does read oddly.
I guess we have a definition of rare. Even the older ones are not that rare (still thousands exists).
But the point is, we all look at these nominations with our own standards and project these to nominations in other cultures. If all nominations would be judged globally, we would see a completely different outcome of many nominations. I would prefer a level playing field, but I also understand the benefits of having the local view, but I sometimes believe the wayfarer standard looks like the UK/US view is leading.
(I also don’t get it why in some countries people would genuinely believe banks are social places. But I don’t live there.)
The State Survey Markers in Australia are complete garbage for wayspots. They are not explored by anyone. I am going by the lack of justification in this forum when they have been discussed.
The pre-EIIR postboxes in the UK are definitely a point of exploration for a part of the wider community. There are websites which discuss them in detail and list where they are. They hark back to an older era and are part of the historic fabric of society. You might not find them interesting and a random person stopped in the street might not, but just like trainspotters who stand on bridges to catch engines they haven’t logged before, there are people who enjoy finding these.
I am not saying that Banks Should / Shouldn’t be rejected but I have never reviewed in that area.
My comments where in regards to the other places you brought up. These have had several threads where they have been discussed allowing us to make a decision. This is the first one I have seen regarding banks and at the moment nobody has come up with a convincing argument so if I was to review there I would likely reject. The only comment from the OP is that you could be social whilst waiting but this is a “could” and not a “designed for”. I could be social in the doctors waiting room, doesn’t make it eligible.
I have previously reviewed US Neighbourhood Signs and due to many comments here I have made the decision that Reject is the stronger argument so this is what I have done.
This is my understanding of removal criteria. It isn’t official for obvious reasons. I have highlighted the one that probably applies here.
To be removed, a wayspot needs to meet any of the following (there may be other things that I have missed):
- The POI does not exist
- The POI is on school grounds or single-family private residential property, including the external boundary - the POI is strictly and obviously not eligible (e.g., a generic direction sign)
- the POI is not safely accessible (not to everyone, but to people allowed to be there)
- the POI is obstructing operations of emergency services
I have definitely seen comments from Scopely Explore where they say a removal was done because the POI didn’t meet eligibility criteria (I’m paraphrasing).
It’s a wonderful example of what that ‘trainspotter’ mentality can do when it comes to old, rare, overlooked things. The guy who runs it is incredibly lovely and was overjoyed that I had found him another cast-iron rarity.
I just wanted to know if a potential Waypoint might be viable, but enjoyed his sheer glee.
