Please fill out the following sections to the best of your ability, it will help us investigate bugs if we have this information at the outset. Screenshots are especially helpful, so please provide those if you can.
Platform (Android, iOS, Website): Website
URLs (aka web addresses) of any relevant observations or pages: Seen on https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/263716717, presumably visible on any Tachycineta in flight from the side within the range of Tachycineta thalassina
Screenshots of what you are seeing (instructions for taking a screenshot on computers and mobile devices: https://www.take-a-screenshot.org/):
Description of problem (please provide a set of steps we can use to replicate the issue, and make as many as you need.):
Step 1: Use computer vision to suggest an ID for a Tachycineta in flight within the range of Tachycineta thalassina
Step 2: Observe CV’s example of Tachycineta thalassina is a Tachycineta bicolor
My apologies if this is not the correct place for this - I could fix this particular instance by disagreeing with the observation the CV is referencing. The larger concern I have is that the observation the CV is referencing has been at casual status for around 2 months, but the CV has chosen to use it as its exemplary picture from that angle. Why is this?
It’s not actually about the CV, it’s about the taxon photos on iNat for each taxon (up to 12 selected photos). The dropdown just shows either the first photo or the best match (following a recent change). These taxon photos are chosen either automatically as the first observation in the taxon reaches RG (I believe) or by members of the community, and if there’s a problem with one, it’s actually something you can fix yourself in most cases.
Just go to the relevant taxon page, go to ‘edit photos’ under curation (on the right, below the graph) and remove the offending photo. Ideally, if the photo is incorrectly identified, you’d also open the observation and provide a correct ID.
I did not know I had the ability to do that, but I see it now and have corrected it - thank you!
This photo was from an observation with two images where one was Tachycineta thalassina and the other was Tachycineta bicolor, so I had just made a comment that they were two species and checked the box that evidence was not related to a single subject. I suppose I could have also disagreed with the species-level ID, but I thought it was moot since it would be marked as casual.
It’s worth being aware that Casual grade photos can still show up in the photo gallery if people choose ‘all’ rather than ‘RG’, so I’ll sometimes go for the lowest common ancestor if there are multiple subjects - but I admit I don’t always bother, particularly if they’re different enough that people can’t get confused. Hopefully the observer will correct it anyway! :-)
