I agree, but in this case, surely these are already agreed to Research Grade? (Unless there are subspecies requiring elevation to Research Grade - in which case good!!).
But on higher taxa requiring ID to species level, I fully support this.
Alternatively it could be on the taxon menu bar - e.g. genus:
( [Map] [About] [Trends] [Taxonomy] [Similar Taxa] [Help ID] )
Only please dont make it default to seeing everything that I have not reviewed: only those that actually require an ID for research grade.
In what case? The 10,149 observations listed in the screenshot are a mix of Needs ID and Research Grade (verifiable=true vs. verifiable=any). The Help Identify link would go to this URL, which by default excludes Casual and Research Grade observations: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?taxon_id=12942
Oh, I kinda don’t like that idea! It goes straight to a thumbnail page that is 100% showing “Agree” buttons and invites the problematic agreements where the identifier doesn’t see the description/comments! Maybe after the thumbnail “Agree” buttons are conditionally not shown for comments and multi-photos I would see the benefit in this!
That’s a confusing comment which piques my interest in hearing more about your identification workflow, since this is the way the Identify page has looked for several years. But that’s a discussion better held elsewhere than this feature request I think…
This would be a nice shortcut for times when I’m on a taxon page and see a bunch of questionable out of range observations that need to be curated. I’d support this.