On the off chance that someone may stack photos of different organisms in the same observation or even better photos are added, I think observations that are RG should be bumped back. As an example, if an observation has 2 ids and is RG but the observer adds three more, it should need one more id f…

[image] arboretum_amy: How about instead of going back to needs ID, everyone following the obs gets a notification that new photos have been added. Yes, this didn’t seem to be mentioned as part of the revamped notifications system , but would seem logical to include. And I would like to get n…

Yep, though as @marina_gorbunova points out, it’s in the app. [Screenshot_20200808-144248_iNaturalist]

[image] jdmore: Changing back to “Needs ID” could be problematic, since that status is calculated from existing identifications, Data Quality Assessment parameters, etc. How would the system temporarily ignore those factors, and decide when to stop ignoring them again? Adding photos could set…

[Cross-referencing similar Feature Request here] https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/have-system-add-a-comment-when-photos-change/14985

[image] kiwifergus: Perhaps a new DQA for “evidence in observation has been altered”, which requires all identifiers so far on the observation to acknowledge in order to clear it. Oh, that’s an interesting alternative. You should make it a feature request.

[image] kiwifergus: requires all identifiers so far on the observation to acknowledge in order to clear it. That could be a problem if one or more of the identifiers becomes inactive, or isn’t paying attention.

Glad to know that’s in there. I use the website mostly so I never noticed it in the app.

The only times (twice, I think) that I have added photos it has been to clarify an unIDed observation with another image of the same individual/group. How would the proposed change affect the trajectory of such an observation to RG?

[image] jdmore: That could be a problem if one or more of the identifiers becomes inactive, or isn’t paying attention. could be, or currently is…? or do you mean adding to the already problematic inactivity affecting other aspects of the ID system?

I can’t speak for @jdmore , but I think it’s a “could be”. Currently, DQA turnovers can be by anyone who is active to be able to vote thumbs up/down; they aren’t limited to only those who have already left an ID on the observation “so far”, as you proposed.

Bump Observations Back to "Needs ID" if Photos are Added

Feature Requests

schoenitz September 6, 2020, 3:09am 25

The feature request is here: https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/create-a-draft-mode-for-uploaded-observations/2538, consider voting for it.

Topic		Replies	Views
Notify on new picture upload Feature Requests	10	881	November 24, 2022
Users change picture after the first ID is made General	40	1317	May 11, 2026
Have system add a comment when photos or audio change Feature Requests	21	3366	April 24, 2022
Make "No, it's as good as it can be" take effect with fewer than 2 IDs Feature Requests	26	2739	June 20, 2019
Observations without media should not allow IDs by other users Feature Requests	24	809	December 13, 2024

Bump Observations Back to "Needs ID" if Photos are Added

Related topics