Good Evening, I have an image of VP-BBR taken in DFW on 23MAR20 currently in the queue that has been deprioritized, despite anther photographer having an image of the same airplane at the same airport from just a day before being added to the DB mere hours after it was photographed.

I remarked the relevance of the shot to current events and being 'talk of the town' per the priority queue guidelines in the forums here.

Thanks

Hi Kev,

You're talking about my photo which was added on March 22nd.

On the priority guidelines, it says:

- Priority screening is given up to 24 hours after the first photo was added.

Was it in the queue within 24 hours of my shot being accepted? I know the screeners adhere very strictly to 24 hours on the dot. Not a minute over..

Just for a more exact frame of time reference:

My AZAL shot was added on 3/21 at 2122, date and time being local.

Dylan

First world problem.

I'm with ya. I had a shot of several AA 787s parked at TUL that was deprioritized and rejected. To be fair, it did get rejected for other reasons as well. I think all COVID-related aviation occurrences should qualify for priority screening, but maybe that's just me.

KPDX wrote:

Hi Kev,

You're talking about my photo which was added on March 22nd.

On the priority guidelines, it says:

- Priority screening is given up to 24 hours after the first photo was added.

Was it in the queue within 24 hours of my shot being accepted? I know the screeners adhere very strictly to 24 hours on the dot. Not a minute over..

Just for a more exact frame of time reference:

My AZAL shot was added on 3/21 at 2122, date and time being local.

Dylan

Hey Dylan,

I had gotten the departure at 0925ish local and had it uploaded by noon so I was safely within the 24hr period. Additionally, a similar Air Europa shot was deprioritized since my initial post.

As mentioned above, first world problem, not a big deal. Great job catching the arrival, and I’m glad at least one of us isn’t getting deprioritized. No offense to the screeners as well, I know how hard they work and I’m sure whoever deprioritized it is simply trying to follow their rules/directions. There’s no such thing as a perfect screening system after all.

So I’m just asking that the rules are clarified for everyone to avoid inconsistencies going forward.

pilotkev1 wrote:

KPDX wrote:

Hi Kev,

You're talking about my photo which was added on March 22nd.

On the priority guidelines, it says:

- Priority screening is given up to 24 hours after the first photo was added.

Was it in the queue within 24 hours of my shot being accepted? I know the screeners adhere very strictly to 24 hours on the dot. Not a minute over..

Just for a more exact frame of time reference:

My AZAL shot was added on 3/21 at 2122, date and time being local.

Dylan

Hey Dylan,

I had gotten the departure at 0925ish local and had it uploaded by noon so I was safely within the 24hr period. Additionally, a similar Air Europa shot was deprioritized since my initial post.

As mentioned above, first world problem, not a big deal. Great job catching the arrival, and I’m glad at least one of us isn’t getting deprioritized. No offense to the screeners as well, I know how hard they work and I’m sure whoever deprioritized it is simply trying to follow their rules/directions. There’s no such thing as a perfect screening system after all.

So I’m just asking that the rules are clarified for everyone to avoid inconsistencies going forward.

Im having the same issue. Uploaded a photo of the Air Europa 787-9 ten minutes after landing at DFW. First ever Air Europa flight to land at DFW and it should of been a priority add, but was deprioritized shortly after. So what exactly are the rules? I've seen other pics get added as priority for the same instance....one was just added a few hours ago.

Interesting.....nobody from Airliners.net wants to answer our questions or emails....something to hide perhaps some sort of favoritism?

TUSAA wrote:

Interesting.....nobody from Airliners.net wants to answer our questions or emails....something to hide perhaps some sort of favoritism?

Well, the screener who used to respond to everyone's questions is no longer a screener, so...

TUSAA wrote:

Interesting.....nobody from Airliners.net wants to answer our questions or emails....something to hide perhaps some sort of favoritism?

Well, the screener who used to respond to everyone's questions is no longer a screener, so...

Hello all, the rules have not changed. Recently, photos pertaining to Covid 19 were being allowed for Priority Screening. However, it is required that a publicly viewable comment (i.e. caption) be included to indicate the relevancy to Covid-19. Not sure why you image was de-prioritized. If it was a standard image of an aircraft at an airport or in the air with no comment, it is possible that the screener saw it simply as another image that did not qualify for Priority Screening. If it was marked as PS for a non-Covid-19 reason, it is also possible that it was inadvertently de-prioritized.

In any event, the rules have not changed. If you feel it has been, I recommend that you contact the screeners via email with the upload ID and ask for re-consideration.

Regards,

Jehan

Curious why the following shots were accepted with priority:

Looks like it got Priority Screened in error.

Jehan

They were linked off the front page with a banner for the Anniversary Sticker applied. But they’ve been on there for a couple months and there are other frames in the database wearing it.

I have a photo,according with the rules of priority screening,but result is depriority. I created a topic here ask what is reason of depriority,but manager deleted the topic

ufospotter wrote:

I have a photo,according with the rules of priority screening,but result is depriority. I created a topic here ask what is reason of depriority,but manager deleted the topic

If you give me the photo ID I can take a look at it.

Daniel

Curious why the following shots were accepted with priority:

These were "Talk of the Town" events. I suppose it would have been better if the photographer added a caption. It was noted in the Priority Screening comments that are visible to the screeners.


Jehan

Not sure why these are "talk of the town" events as all types/liveries have visited the airport at least once before on scheduled services. In that case pretty much anything non-based can be regarded as "talk of the town" and be eligible for priority screening.
On the other hand, last week I uploaded a photo of a certain a/c with a revised livery (titles removed) compared with the photos in the database, which was de-prioritized (ID 6155893).

An easyJet A321 is the talk of the town in Amsterdam? I know traffic is down and times are bad but come on ..!

Any particular reason why this one was screened with priority?

Another one which I can't figure out:

Hi dutchspotter1

No worries. That qualified as a first visit by that operator oF the model to AMS. First visits quailify for priority

Regards

Thanks, except that it wasn't a first visit of this operator/model combi. It's been at AMS a bunch of times before. The fact that there aren't any other photos of this combi at AMS in the database doesn't mean it's a first visit.

Hi again dutchspotter1

We can't dispute you're right. It has been there a bunch of times before. That said, this image is the first photographed visit of that model by the operator to AMS which means it received priority screening in line with our rules.

Please note: Photographed visit not just a visit is why it received priority

Hi PanAm_DC10, last year a uploaded a 77W of Egyptair at AMS (an upgrade from the regular 737s - COVID-related). There were no other photos of an MS 77W at AMS in the database yet, so I uploaded it with priority. However the upload was deprioritized, but it I read your response it should be screened with priority right? Or am I missing something here?

Kind regards,
Joost

PanAm_DC10 wrote:

Hi again dutchspotter1

We can't dispute you're right. It has been there a bunch of times before. That said, this image is the first photographed visit of that model by the operator to AMS which means it received priority screening in line with our rules.

Please note: Photographed visit not just a visit is why it received priority

Just had two similar cases (Privilege Style A321 and Blue Air B737MAX) which were both de-prioritized after the screener asked for a second opinion. So I am not sure what the current rules are but it is al getting very confusing.

FLJ wrote:

Hi PanAm_DC10, last year a uploaded a 77W of Egyptair at AMS (an upgrade from the regular 737s - COVID-related). There were no other photos of an MS 77W at AMS in the database yet, so I uploaded it with priority. However the upload was deprioritized, but it I read your response it should be screened with priority right? Or am I missing something here?

Kind regards,
Joost

Hi Joost,

We did give prio to Covid related cargo flights, and planes being stored for Covid last year. Keep in mind that the more details you put in the message to screeners regarding why you are requesting prio the better. The prio guidelines now say that if it's a first visit for a type and airline it qualifies for prio. As a general rule, if we don't have certain type of aircraft in the db from that airline at that airport, it can get prio screening. This can fall under the "talk of the town" guideline, under which there is screener discretion on whether it get added as prio, or get deprioritized. We working on new guidelines for priority screening. No matter how hard we try to make the rules clear, there will always be gray areas.

Regards,
Daniel

dgorun wrote:

The prio guidelines now say that if it's a first visit for a type and airline it qualifies for prio. As a general rule, if we don't have certain type of aircraft in the db from that airline at that airport, it can get prio screening.

Hi Daniel,

Thank you for your reply. Would you be able to comment on photo ID 6462127 and 6462129 which were deprioritized? I mentioned in the remarks that it's the first (photographed) visit at my local airport for this airline/model combo and yet they were deprioritized for an unknown reason.

Kind regards,

(the other) Joost

dutchspotter1 wrote:

dgorun wrote:

The prio guidelines now say that if it's a first visit for a type and airline it qualifies for prio. As a general rule, if we don't have certain type of aircraft in the db from that airline at that airport, it can get prio screening.

Hi Daniel,

Thank you for your reply. Would you be able to comment on photo ID 6462127 and 6462129 which were deprioritized? I mentioned in the remarks that it's the first (photographed) visit at my local airport for this airline/model combo and yet they were deprioritized for an unknown reason.

Kind regards,

(the other) Joost

Hi Joost,

I'm not exactly sure why, but I'm guessing screener discretion was used. The A321 was untitled frame, I'm guessing that could be why. The Blue air 737 I'm not sure, but maybe it's because it could become a regular visitor. These are just a few guesses.

Cheers,
Daniel

Thanks Daniel, let's hope the new guidelines will make things a little less confusing.

Dear screeners
following this conversation, I also would like ask about prioritize for first visit airlines.
Today I got Deprioritized for my photo (first visit Euroatlantic in Bali ever). Is this correct decision ?
Kind regards
Robert

Hello Robert,

From your description, it should have received Priority Screening. However, without seeing the image and the submission, I cannot determine if the screener had a reason for de-prioritizing it. Please send an email together with the photo ID# to headscreeners@airliners.net and we can take a look at it.

Regards,

Jehan

Hi all,

Ref. ID 6501637, can anybody explain why a Cathay Dragon A320 visiting Amsterdam was deprioritized? Narrowbody east-Asian aircraft are not normally seen at this airport, besides it was a first visit of this airline. I made sure to mention this in the comments (also the "talk of the town").
Thanks in advance for the clarification.
Can't wait for the new guidelines to be published

Unbelievable, the same a/c has now been accepted with priority...

Hello Joost

You're shot has been added

Just a little remark, last night I added a photo of Emirates' new "50 years of UAE" livery on A6-EVG - a special livery that noone had even heard about - and after a (IMHO) petty rejection for being dark, it is now sitting in the queue for 12 hours... I think the website is missing an opportunity on a hot new item that would be a surprise for many, as it hasn't been officially announced by the airline yet.

PanAm_DC10 wrote:

Hi again dutchspotter1

We can't dispute you're right. It has been there a bunch of times before. That said, this image is the first photographed visit of that model by the operator to AMS which means it received priority screening in line with our rules.

Please note: Photographed visit not just a visit is why it received priority

If the first model/operator visits at an airport qualifies for priority, I'm not quite sure why my Citilink A339 (6522707) was deprioritized. It was not only the first visit of a Citilink A330-900 to KEWR, but the first visit of any Citilink aircraft to the entire United States, as they have no scheduled service to North America. That was definitely "the talk of the town", and one of the rarer NYC catches in recent history. There was even a post about it made here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1463847 -- highlighting the rarity of a Citilink plane crossing the pond.

Fly-K wrote:

Just a little remark, last night I added a photo of Emirates' new "50 years of UAE" livery on A6-EVG - a special livery that noone had even heard about - and after a (IMHO) petty rejection for being dark, it is now sitting in the queue for 12 hours... I think the website is missing an opportunity on a hot new item that would be a surprise for many, as it hasn't been officially announced by the airline yet.

Apologies for the delay in screening your image. There are times when the screeners haven't got to it as soon as the uploading photographer would prefer. However, it has since been screened, featured with a banner and is currently in the #3 spot on the front page.

planespot wrote:

PanAm_DC10 wrote:

Hi again dutchspotter1

We can't dispute you're right. It has been there a bunch of times before. That said, this image is the first photographed visit of that model by the operator to AMS which means it received priority screening in line with our rules.

Please note: Photographed visit not just a visit is why it received priority

If the first model/operator visits at an airport qualifies for priority, I'm not quite sure why my Citilink A339 (6522707) was deprioritized. It was not only the first visit of a Citilink A330-900 to KEWR, but the first visit of any Citilink aircraft to the entire United States, as they have no scheduled service to North America. That was definitely "the talk of the town", and one of the rarer NYC catches in recent history. There was even a post about it made here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1463847 -- highlighting the rarity of a Citilink plane crossing the pond.

Hi Cary,

It appears to have been deprioritized in error. The image has now been screened.

Screeners wrote:

planespot wrote:

PanAm_DC10 wrote:

Hi again dutchspotter1

We can't dispute you're right. It has been there a bunch of times before. That said, this image is the first photographed visit of that model by the operator to AMS which means it received priority screening in line with our rules.

Please note: Photographed visit not just a visit is why it received priority

If the first model/operator visits at an airport qualifies for priority, I'm not quite sure why my Citilink A339 (6522707) was deprioritized. It was not only the first visit of a Citilink A330-900 to KEWR, but the first visit of any Citilink aircraft to the entire United States, as they have no scheduled service to North America. That was definitely "the talk of the town", and one of the rarer NYC catches in recent history. There was even a post about it made here: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1463847 -- highlighting the rarity of a Citilink plane crossing the pond.

Hi Cary,

It appears to have been deprioritized in error. The image has now been screened.

No worries, thanks for taking a look into it!

I have a photo in the queue of 2405 (RSAF A330MRTT) at DFW, and it has been deprioritized, but I believe it falls under both 'talk of the town', for both avgeeks and limited news media about its mission to the USA, as well as first visit for a RSAF airplane to DFW in the database.

Q: Inaugural visit of an airline / aircraft type to an airport?
A: Yes. Additionally if there are no other photos of the airline / aircraft combination on airliners.net, which provides priority for one off visits.

RSAF is not really an airline, so I guess this one would apply:

Q: Rare military jet visits (e.g. fighters showing up at a civil airport that rarely sees them)?
A: No.

Nevertheless confusing indeed.

Hello there, I added a photo of a new airline visit to Schiphol (ID: 6797803) but somehow it was deprioritized. According the rules I still believe it should be screened as priority. Or am I missing some new rules perhaps? Greets Stefan

Hello Stefan

A first visit applies and your image has been screened. Sorry for our error

Paul

PanAm_DC10 wrote:

Hello Stefan

A first visit applies and your image has been screened. Sorry for our error

Paul

Thank you!

Hi, Paul. I have the same problem as Stefan now. I uploaded a photo of Flypop's first visit to Xiamen, but screener's decision was deprioritized. (Photo ID: #6812377) However, last month, I uploaded two photos of the first visit to Xiamen of Ethiopian 777F from different angles, but they were accepted. My question is why different screeners have different definitions of priority photos. Doesn't A.net have unified rules and standards for priority?

Hi WZYAFX

I agree and your image has been screened.

Please note the HS are working on defining the priority guidelines for the acceptance guide to be updated. The priority team will be included and any from the community in a new topic we will create.

We're updating our crew emails so communication is poor for a few days. Should any members of the community have priority questions they'd like clarification on please let us know with a forum post.

We're aiming to be as transparent as possible and in no way will we allow any quality standards to be lowered. Boneyard Safari were masters of manipulation demanding priority for a 10cm decal we're not going to tolerate their quality reduction standards anymore.

Regards

Paul

PanAm_DC10 wrote:

Hi WZYAFX

I agree and your image has been screened.

Please note the HS are working on defining the priority guidelines for the acceptance guide to be updated. The priority team will be included and any from the community in a new topic we will create.

We're updating our crew emails so communication is poor for a few days. Should any members of the community have priority questions they'd like clarification on please let us know with a forum post.

We're aiming to be as transparent as possible and in no way will we allow any quality standards to be lowered. Boneyard Safari were masters of manipulation demanding priority for a 10cm decal we're not going to tolerate their quality reduction standards anymore.

Regards

Paul

Thank you very much for your reply!

PanAm_DC10 wrote:

Hi WZYAFX

I agree and your image has been screened.

Please note the HS are working on defining the priority guidelines for the acceptance guide to be updated. The priority team will be included and any from the community in a new topic we will create.

We're updating our crew emails so communication is poor for a few days. Should any members of the community have priority questions they'd like clarification on please let us know with a forum post.

We're aiming to be as transparent as possible and in no way will we allow any quality standards to be lowered. Boneyard Safari were masters of manipulation demanding priority for a 10cm decal we're not going to tolerate their quality reduction standards anymore.

Regards

Paul

Help me understand this a little bit. It's not revising the priority screening guidelines that has me perplexed - more clarity on what does and does not merit priority screening is always going to be a good thing.

What I am not understanding is the quite deliberate calling out/criticism of specific contributors to this Website and the Database. For years we have been cautioned in threads here that if we are questioning an acceptance or trying to understand why something was accepted that we should not stray into criticism of the Photographers themselves. To see this remark from a member of the Airliners.net team seems to fly in the face of that spirit entirely - plus it seems completely out of left field. What does Boneyard Safari have to do with this thread thus far? I think we have always strived to keep the level of discourse here above the level of leveling insults at people.

I am also curious about the manipulation you've mentioned. Was a member of Boneyard Safari a screener? I am trying to understand how they could have manipulated anything if they did not set the Priority Screening rules and they were not screening the images themselves. Now, if the rules were written such that images that Airliners.net feel should not have been screened on a priority basis were allowed to be screened as such ... that sounds like a failure of the guidelines more than anything. It seems somewhat disingenuous to criticize folks for following the letter of the law - if the Guidelines allow priority for 10cm Decals, should folks not avail themselves of that? I know I have questioned at times why a photo of a random airplane with a new registration warrants priority - but I certainly have requested it when I was eligible.

It seems to me that Airliners.net as a business would thrive based on page visits and views on images - and Boneyard Safari definitely delivered those in spades from what I noticed over the years. I would say they consistently raised the quality of the images being featured on this site - and the viewership of the Website seemed to agree based on how frequently I would see their images in the Top of the Day.

Again, I don't know that specifically calling out a specific group and accusing them of manipulation in such a public way is in keeping with the rules of the road here. The Forum's first rule talks about respecting other users, stating " Please word all criticism, whether of another user's opinion, a photograph, crew member, a political topic, etc., in a constructive manner. Criticism which serves no purpose other than to incite or insult other members will be deleted and your account possibly suspended". This feels like it falls short of that goal.

Hello NPeterman

Agree we will thrive with updated rules in the acceptance guide for priority screening. Yes a member of Boneyard Safari was a screener and withheld it from the team and owners. There's a lot more than said and that group is better suited to low quality community standard social media sites. All the best to them.

This is a moderated forum with rules and guidelines enforced by the volunteer crew. Our guidelines are not low quality as many are used too.

I said we want transparency and community inclusion. Once our emails are sorted we'll get the ball rolling and every screener will be able to participate in the re-write of the rules. It is our hope that the forum discussion created to convey and discuss these changes to the community will see many contribute with their thoughts and ideas. That way the entire community will be involved in the update.

Again, at no point will a single quality standard be reduced. In fact, we're going to be more firm but fair.

I accept your last point fact is it's not in the spirit of the community to tamper with crew or community accounts. Send vitriolic messages on Christmas day abusing crew member families or not even have a reasonable discussion in the forum without changing their "facts" every post. As for unauthorized lifting of bans without informing their team that's never been seen in the history of this site before. That is what they delivered and it is not acceptable for this community or the owners.

Quality standards also apply to abiding by the forum and acceptance guide rules. Unfortunately some don't see it that way. I'm sorry we're not the poorly moderated social media platform some want us to be.