Broken photo link observations are still Needs ID

When someone’s photo goes missing, shouldn’t it become “casual” automatically? As in this example: There doesn’t seem to be a point to having it in the needs ID stream when there is no photo.

When my photo and ID recently orphaned each other (and I am not at all clear how or why) they both became casual … which at least alerted me to the orphaning.

Yes, that would give someone a chance to find that it had happened, especially if they peruse their casual observations occasionally. If my photos start disappearing, I won’t be able to do anything about it, since I don’t keep my photos, but for those who do keep them it would give them a chance to replace the photos. Did yours move to “casual” because someone checked the box in the Data Quality section that says the observation can’t be improved?

I tried refreshing the link from Flickr, but it was unsuccessful, which removed the broken image icon and now the observation is casual grade.

So are these disappearing photos just a casualty of being from Flicker? I hadn’t realized the symbol meant the link was broken and the photo might still be there.

Yeah, the links to iNat from Flickr, Picasa, and Facebook all do this. I think it was changed to store a copy of the photo locally to avoid this issue (your example was from 2013), but I’m not sure about that.


Mine was a direct upload and it was fine for a few weeks. I removed it, so I don’t know if it was voted to casual or automatically kicked.

When photos are totally removed, the observation automatically becomes casual grade. But when there is a little “broken image icon”, that is still technically counting as a “photo”, so it doesn’t mark it as lacking a photo (casual grade).

1 Like

In the case of a Flickr photo gone missing (which should happen anymore, I believe) the observation shouldn’t automatically become casual. For example, if IDs had been added to it before the photo was broken, those IDs were made by evaluating the photo when it was there (one hopes).

@angi_gregoire Was that observation uploaded via the Android app?

Yes it was.