Warning for “Incorrect or spam edits” after trying to update an outdated Wayspot

General Discussion
1

Hello,

I received an enforcement warning for “Incorrect or spam edits” after trying to update the outdated title of an existing Wayspot, and I am genuinely frustrated and concerned by this decision.

The Wayspot is titled “Soma Galeria.” The location is now PF Casa de Estudos, which can be verified on Google Maps:

Both are spaces related to art/cultural activities, and there was no physical sign with the name “Soma Galeria” identifying the Wayspot. I was not trying to move the Wayspot, replace it with an unrelated POI, manipulate its location, or gain any gameplay advantage. I simply tried to make its information reflect the current real-world situation.

My edit was rejected. I then used the official appeal process and clearly explained that the place had changed its name/ownership. The appeal was also rejected.

I can accept a rejection.

What I cannot understand is why this resulted in an enforcement warning for spam/incorrect edits.

After researching similar cases in this community, I understand that Niantic may consider a change of ownership to require removing the old Wayspot and submitting the new establishment separately. If that is the correct procedure, that’s fine — I am willing to follow it.

But using the wrong procedure in good faith is not the same as abusing Wayfarer.

I did not submit fake information. I did not manipulate the location. I did not repeatedly spam edits. I submitted an update, it was rejected, and I used the appeal system provided by Niantic to explain why I believed the information was outdated.

If my edit was considered incorrect, rejecting it was enough. Issuing an abuse warning against someone who was genuinely trying to improve the accuracy of the platform makes absolutely no sense to me.

Wayfarer relies on players voluntarily spending their time keeping its database accurate. If attempting to correct outdated information can put our accounts at risk, even when acting in good faith, why should contributors feel comfortable submitting corrections at all?

An incorrect edit and an abusive edit are not the same thing.

I have already opened a support ticket, but I am asking the Wayfarer team to please review this enforcement action and explain what exactly I did that constitutes spam or abuse, rather than simply an edit they disagreed with.

I am happy to provide the rejected edit, my appeal, the warning email, photos and any other evidence needed.

I genuinely want to contribute and improve Wayfarer. Being punished for trying to do exactly that is extremely discouraging.

Captura de tela 2026-08-12 171236
Captura de tela 2026-08-12 171236780×414 9.87 KB

2

Hello and Welcome,

Is this place commercial?

My guess is a problem of re-purposing.

If a place closes down and a new Business takes over then the correct procedure is to report the original for removal then make a new nomination for the new one.

Good Luck.

3

Thanks for the welcome and for your explanation! I understand what you mean about re-purposing.

In this particular case, though, I think an important detail is that the nature of the place essentially remained the same. It was an art gallery/art space before, and it continues to be an art gallery/art space at the same location. What changed was mainly the name and management/ownership.

That’s why, from my perspective, I understood this as outdated information that could be corrected with a title edit, rather than a completely different business replacing the original POI.

I understand now that Niantic may still consider removal + a new nomination to be the correct procedure when ownership changes, and I’m perfectly fine with following that procedure.

My main concern is really the warning itself. Even if I misunderstood the correct procedure, I made the edit in good faith because the Wayspot information no longer reflected the current place. I don’t think that should be treated the same way as spam or an attempt to abuse the system.

Thanks again for the clarification!

4

First, the email is just a Educational Email. It does not effect your accounts. Before you ask, Yes, the wording could be much clearer :frowning:

I had the same happen to me with a local Coffee Shop. The owner retired and sold it to a long term member of staff. The new owners daughter joined so they renamed it after Her. Edits Rejected.

To put it to the extreme using your case…

  • Old Art Gallery closes.
  • New company takes over, it is still an Art Gallery but it only deals in Adult Art.
  • The new business has not been reviewed and should have been Rejected as “Adult Location”.

It seems strange for the majority of cases but once you know the reason why it (sort of) makes sense.

5

Thanks, your example does help me understand the reasoning behind the rule.

However, in my case the email was not just educational. It specifically says We have issued a warning against your Wayfarer and Pokémon GO accounts, and Im receiving the 24-hour warning screen in Pokémon GO every time I opened the app.

I also think the distinction needs to be clearer. Wayfarer gives us the option to edit a Wayspots title, presumably because names can change over time. If a place remains an art gallery at the same location but changes its name/management, a title edit seemed like a reasonable choice to me. Otherwise, I’m not sure where exactly title edits are supposed to apply.

I can accept that I misunderstood the correct procedure. What concerns me is that a good-faith mistake resulted in an account warning instead of simply having the edit rejected and the correct procedure explained.

Thanks again for the explanation

6

Unfortunately this is where my knowledge lets me down :frowning: I have been fortunate enough not to get any warnings, I assumed the email shown was the educational 1 as it doesn’t state about the 24 hours.

I would have to assume this is the only “violation” and is the 1 that caused the warning, if this is the case then it does seem harsh.

Only staff would be able to confirm that this is the case, might sound that I am not believing what you have said but we do get people “playing down” what’s happened until staff state different so I will step back and allow staff to reply.

Good Luck

7

Thats completely fair, I understand your position. And yes, this is the only violation involved, which is why the warning surprised me so much.

Hopefully a staff member can take a look and clarify what happened. I’ll wait for an official response from the Wayfarer staff before drawing any further conclusions.

Thanks for taking the time to discuss it and explain the reasoning behind the repurposing rule, I really appreciate it!

8

Hey @geankaminski ,

Please refer to my DM for more information.

Best,