This submission potentially has an access issue, but quiet country roads don’t come with pavements and this wasn’t the reason for rejection. Can anyone explain why both reviewers and Niantic didn’t like this milestone submission?
Reviewers provided these top reasons for not accepting this submission:
- The submission lacks uniqueness or historical and cultural meaning
Appeal Notes
Old milestones in the UK are highly worth of exploration and even have a charity (the Milestone Society) dedicated to finding and preserving them.
Niantic Note
Thanks for the appeal, Explorer! The nomination in question does not meet the Wayfarer criteria as it seems like a generic milestone.
Description
This old slate milestone is embedded in the wall on the road through the mountains of Eryri National Park between Penygroes and Rhyd Ddu. These are both villages, making this milestone very different to most as they don’t mark a major settlement. This shows the importance this milestone had for this route.
Supplemental Information
Easily accessible and visible from google streetview. Safe to access from the edge of this quiet country road.
Submissions on country lanes sometimes get rejected for access, but it’s often accepted that people walk down the side of these lanes. I would have expected a rejection for pedestrian access if it was rejected for that reason.
Lots of the old Milestones in England are Grade II listed showing that they have historic interest. Is it possible this is too?
It doesn’t appear to be listed. Ironically, I don’t place much value in listing, because you find submitters putting forward old buildings and saying they are valid just because they are listed - just because it is old, it doesn’t become eligible (see above).
For me, milestones are remarkable. I referenced the Milestone Society to demonstrate I’m not alone in this.
I’m aware of this. In the UK, we have lots of old things that are automatically acceptable (by the community anyway) without the submitter having to specifically demonstrate that they meet exploration criteria - merely stating that they are that type of object is sufficient. Examples of this is Boundary Markers and (of course) Postboxes pre-EIIR. I genuinely thought Milestones fell into the same category.
When you come across reviews of Boundary Markers, Postboxes pre-EIIR and Milestones, or other similar old objects, do the submitters provide any more evidence of eligibility than I did?
I just don’t understand why people can look at a milestone and go “meh”.
I’d be inclined to vote for it, but concerned about the pedestrian safety aspect. If it’s an unrestricted road then that could be a hazard.
I wouldn’t have complained if rejected for pedestrian access, as it’s a borderline case. If the review rejection had been “not interesting” and the appeal rejection had been “unsafe”, I’d have understood, because I always take review rejection reasons with a pinch of salt. For the appeal reviewer to say “generic milestone” stings a little - it’s a little like rejecting something for being a “generic church”, “generic pub”, “generic national coastal path marker” etc.
The fact that they are listed and therefore protected by law shows that they have some historic merit.
I am not saying that “Grade Listed” = “Accepted” but it goes a long way of showing that it is worthy of “Explore”.
I have seen many “Generic Business” that is located in a Grade II Listed building. The nominator has nominated the “Grade II Listed Building” and not the current business giving the history of the building. I have always voted “Accept” on these as long as all other factors are in order.
I just worked out why I was finding NO listed buildings in this area. For some reason, Historic England doesn’t record listed buildings in Wales.
On checking the Welsh listings at DataMapWales, every other milestone on this road is listed (e.g., Listed Buildings - Full Report - HeritageBill Cadw Assets - Reports Reason for designation: Included for its special historic interest as a turnpike road milestone, a well-preserved example of a characteristic local type.”), but this one got missed.
It’s already rejected and rejected, and I don’t live anywhere near it, so resubmitting is out of the question. I just couldn’t work out what was wrong with it (still can’t to be honest). I suspected you weren’t in the UK when you questioned why a milestone was worthy 
Adds to ever growing list of places to visit.
It’s a B road? So at that spot I would say not safe.
Nice object, not nice location.
It’s a B road. I’ll take it as reviewers didn’t like public access but decided to pick a random rejection reason instead of the correct one, and the appeal reviewer didn’t see a reason to overturn. (Based on a few other posts, appeal reviewers don’t appear to be reviewing from scratch, but starting from “this was rejected” and deciding if that should be reversed. It’s a legitimate but questionable approach).
The entire area is worth a visit That road has all of its milestones still intact, which is unusual, and it leads to an excellent route up to Snowdown.
Not at all related to this post, but as it’s in the area - I found several of these on that route to Snowdon but only submitted one (due to walking being the priority) which has been accepted.
“B roads are numbered distributor roads, which have lower traffic densities than the main trunk roads, or A roads. This classification has nothing to do with the width or quality of the physical road, and B roads can range from dual carriageways to single track roads with passing places.“
For Many B Roads in the UK it would be expected that people will be walking on them. Roads like the one above would probably regularly have tourists / hikers walking along them.
A busier B road would likely have a path at least on one side (a better Supplemental should show this).
This might seem strange but to me…
- A path on the other side = Not Safe = Reject.
- No path = Safe = Accept.
In the UK, apart from Motorways and some Major A Roads all roads are expected to be pedestrian accessible so no path on a single carriageway usually translates to pedestrians walking on the side of the road.
Makes sense to me.
This particular B road is the only road through a mountain pass and has no other roads to the north or south for several miles, but is ridiculously quiet because it is from one village to another, without a major destination.
I agree that I wouldn’t hesitate to walk along there. However with all that nice scenary and bends I would need to be alert to traffic who are also coping with the same distractions.
So walking fine stopping to interact …not so good.
Scenery isn’t too shabby…
Its an area I have visited on several occasions and drivers would definitely be expecting to come across groups of hikers walking along there. I would definitely not reject as unsafe.
It’s not 100% but the amount of digits included in the road number can also be an indicator with busier B Road tending to have 3 digits and quieter ones having 4. It can’t be relied on as the same road can go through both busy and quiet sections but it is an indicator.
I suppose another point to consider is that we drive on left ……so there actually is a clear line of sight for those approaching on that side of the road.
Also, at this particular location, the road widens out into an almost-layby, making it possible to safely stop a car, get out and take photos (I wasn’t walking along the road that day as Snowdon was my goal!), during which no other vehicles went past. That spot has excellent line of sight. Those factors combined meant I thought it was sufficiently accessible to get accepted.
I can only give my opinion but I would accept.
If amazingly it became a Gym this would not be the best place to hold a Raid Party and any Pokemon left in there is likely to be stuck for some time but don’t think they are reasons to Reject.
If it stays as a Stop the kids would be able to spin as you steadily drive past admiring the view. Kids would not look up from the screen stating “it’s just a big hill 
“
