App should highlight your own observations that are missing info needed for it to appear in the (DEFAULT) Identify page

Platform(s), such as mobile, website, API, other: Mobile, maybe Web (though in web there are alreay ways to see this)

URLs (aka web addresses) of any pages, if relevant:[userid]&verifiable=any (with the user’s name in place of [userid] )
on the for Android & iOS, on the in-app “My Observations” view .

Description of need:
Often when IDing Unknowns from the Identify page, I will visit a user’s observation page to see if they have any other observations that are unknown but not showing in the Identify page.

If they do, it is usually because these additional unknown observations are missing a location. When I leave a comment re: the missing info, they often reply that they were unaware that it was missing, and wondered why their observation had no attention. I know the app warns you when you intentionally leave these fields blank, but it could be that there was an error in upload, or someone intended to go back and add the info later but forgot.

Feature request details:
I propose that when opening the app, after it syncs, any observations that are missing location or date be highlighted, so that the user opens them to see why the app is calling attention to them. Alternatively, instead of a highlight there could be a symbol (exclamation point in triangle, i in circle, asterik, etc).

While I & other Identifiers have filters and other ways to search for these observations, it would be handy to have the app bring these to their observers’ attention so they can fix their observations so they appear on the Identify page.

I can only see 9 observations at the top of my queue, so if I added a bunch of observations I might not see anything that’s highlighted. There could be a banner at the top linking to all observations missing info where the observation could either be dismissed or edited. Not sure how much work that would be to develop though, and how much people would use it.


I’m out of likes, but that’s also good!
[addendum: new day, new like supply. :grin:]

1 Like

That would be nice, maybe like a semi-transparent overlay to draw attention to it without covering up the observation entirely would be nice.
I’ve accidentally left out locations a few times and it hasn’t told me during upload (usually whilst uploading on the go), and I see other serious iNatters doing the same thing often.

1 Like

Instead of “that are missing info needed for it to appear in the Identify page” maybe “missing a date and/or location”? Since any types of observations can be viewed on the Identify page. And photoless, soundless, and captive/cultivated observations are OK. (Dateless and locationless observations are of course 'okay" too, but pretty rarely intended I think.)

I was assuming they weren’t showing without that info based on this line in the frequently used responses, under “missing location”: " If you add the location, your observation will appear in the “Identify” section of the website, where others assist with identification."

Why should only the app highlight these observations and not also the website? After an upload from the app I find out that some names where not added as a species name but as a placeholder. I would like to adjust them soon…

I guess I could clarify that example response and say the “default” page on Identify, but it was written for simplicity.

Edit: thanks - I’ve rewritten it in a way that hopefully makes more sense.

1 Like

I was thinking the website already lists them when you are looking at your observations, but it could hightlight them too. I’ll get thr link and edit my request to get the URL in it.

Oh, it was fine, you didn’t have to edit it for me.
I know you can change the filters on Identify, I only mentioned the text in frequent responses to demonstrate that it also points out observations without that data won’t be on the Identify page by default . As you said, individual identifiers can always change that themselves…

I feel like that current filter workaround puts some of the obligation of insuring the observation is verifiable on the identifiers who choose to change the filters or those come upon them looking up a particular user or project and a highlight could help notify the observer so they can resolve that themselves…

Plus, new users who aren’t aware of some of the iNat etiquette can get a bit snippy if you point missing info out. I have a pretty thick skin, but if the gentle correction were coming site/app instead of from me, maybe it would be better received and acted upon. It would also help Identifier workflow speed a little if we didn’t need to paste in the responses as often…yes, it’s just a few keystrokes, and also, you providing that text is a FANTASTIC help (seriously, thank you)…but across several observations, every bit of time adds up, and while your responses are amazing, I wish I didn’t have to use them as often as I do.

I added the site URL to the request

I updated the topic title to include “default”.

1 Like