See title. I’ve seen a lot of museum specimens marked as captive and I personally don’t think they should be – after all, we likely cannot tell if they were captured from the wild (and fish/bushmeat is often marked as wild, so why couldn’t a museum specimen caught in the wild?), and I personally fin…

A museum specimen, e.g., a pinned insect, herbarium sheet, is not captive. As per the guidelines: “your museum/herbarium specimens that are appropriately marked with date and location of original collection [are wild]”. Please do not mark observations such as these as captive

And if you do that we will mark it as date incorect. iNat is not for falsifying your records, you see specimens now, not 80 years ago when they were collected, don’t lie. [image] jnstuart: Whether it’s appropriate or not, there are such museum records at RG. This one is a historical photo but s…

I do not view correctly recording the date and place of collection as lying. In fact, would view reporting it with the current date and place as a lie, as far as providing information about the plant’s origin goes. However, I will agree with you that there is some potential conflict here.

It’s a lie that you saw it at that date, another person did, you saw it now as casual, you can’t change the date of when you saw the organism to a different one, you weren’t at the place, you didn’t see that plant growing, you saw it dead on a paper.

Some herbarium/musem specimens here and there are not a big deal if properly marked. [image] kgrebennikov: But as for museum collections specifically - I think posting them to the iNaturalist requires great care. Perhaps a much better way is to post them to the GBIF dataset maintained by the or…

Lie is just the opposite of the truth, I don’t add any connotations to that, if you know you weren’t there at that date and still add it, it’s a lie no matter how pure your intentions are, motivations don’t matter when facts get distorted, it’s your name that will be shown with this record, not a pe…

[image] tiwane: Something like a reared pupa is more of a gray area. IMO it’s better to make separate observations for the pupa in the wild and the eclosed adult in captivity and post links to the observations. Yes, of course, there are more complex cases than adults collected in the wild. In…

If it’s not intentional but still wrong, it’s a mistake or a falsehood. A lie almost always comes from an intent to decieve.

marina_gorbunovaorbunova-Yolkina: Lie is just the opposite of the truth No, in English a lie is the opposite of honesty - there is definitely an intention behind it like cheating. Consequently people will get upset and defensive when accused of lying. For example, if I ask a question on an e…

But they do it intentional, it’s clear for them they put not the date they see the organism, they may think they do the right thing, but the know it’s not the representation of life. [image] annkatrinrose: honesty Which means telling the perceived truth. If you make observation and add the d…

It would never have occurred to me that anyone would consider me as trying to deceive if I posted a herbarium specimen with its correct location and date (and collector, if not me). Mounted herbarium specimens are so obviously what they are! Perhaps it would be good to add a statement making it cl…

Do Museum Specimens Count As Captive?

General

Topic		Replies	Views
Museum Specimens / Antique Photos and iNaturalist General question	42	2731	July 15, 2022
How should taxidermy observations be treated? General question	26	913	November 2, 2024
Annotating preserved specimens General	19	402	February 28, 2025
Non-target observations in herbarium specimens - do they have a place on iNaturalist? General	33	1134	September 18, 2022
Which observations should be flagged? General question	37	1450	June 5, 2023

Do Museum Specimens Count As Captive?

Related topics