For taxon changes I have initiated, there are two scenarios where I’ve felt compelled to solicit community feedback before committing the changes. (This is always done in comments in a flag on the relevant taxon, with the top 5-10 identifiers and observers tagged for feedback.)
-
Proposed change would result in a deviation from the accepted iNat framework for that group, or
-
Proposed change would affect more than a dozen or two observations. This is more of a courtesy and heads-up when the change conforms to the accepted taxonomic framework. And how long I wait for feedback is roughly proportional to the number of observations involved. But in a few cases, feedback has come back in support of the existing, non-conforming taxonomy, and then a wider discussion is warranted before making a change that might have to be reversed again in the near future.
I strongly encourage curators to be cautious about potentially high-impact changes, and look for existing flags, discussion, etc., first. And definitely don’t commit a change drafted by a different curator without consulting with them first.
One more reason to get more eyeballs looking at a proposed change is for anything complex, as there can be unforeseen consequences even for more experienced curators.