What’s going on in this observation, which seems like it should be Research Grade at species level?
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/1515628
The text “disagrees with previous finer identifications” is odd. I don’t think I would have explicitly disagreed with the subspecies ID here, so is this is a case of disagreement having been retrospectively attributed to the IDs?
Not sure about the disagreement text, but since two users have marked it as not needing community ID, and the observer opted out of community ID, it’s casual grade.
One of those was me, just now, seeing if it would make a difference. I’ve removed the vote and combined with your Yes vote it’s gone back to Needs ID. But the observer’s ID is the same species - doesn’t this still mean it should be RG at species level?
The observer’s ID is subspecies and several people IDed at species, disagreeing with the subspecies.
Thanks, that does make sense. I understand that because the observer identified at subspecies and then opted out of Community ID, their ID can’t go to RG.
But there is still the odd wording. Why does it not specify the ID that was disagreed with, as it usually seems to? Maybe a recent change in wording?
Yeah, just saw these IDs were made before the disagreeing ID pop-up was added to the site (higher taxon IDs were assumed to be disagreeing before). I know @loarie and others were working on changes to refine the wording this year. Not sure what has changed when this year.
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.