Duplicated Places

Why there are so many duplicates of several places in Colombia, in most of the duplicates what changes is a tilde, it is a problem when I try to add the location to a common name because I don’t know which place is the real one.

1 Like

Because any user can add a new place.

2 things to look for.

If you open each you will see one has a clean url - https://www.inaturalist.org/places/vaupes and the map appears to actually show an actual border.

The other has an odd url and the map is just a dot.

The first is the ‘official’ one. But this is not guaranteed.

fyi I deleted the one that was just a single GPS point. There is no capacity to flag a place, but if you locate duplicates and can document them, curators can (usually) delete or merge them together.

I’ll take the chance to report here something I noticed a while ago, then.
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/trentino-alto-adige--2 (just a point)
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/trentino-alto-adige (has the proper boundary)

This one has a project associated with it. The good news is the owner of the project is still active on the site. The bad news is I don’t speak Italian to send them a message asking them to switch over to the proper one. If you happen to, the user name is lella.

1 Like

I have one to.
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/kwazulu-natal
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/kwazulu-natal-za

The second one appears to be the correct one.

another one:
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/northern-cape--2
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/northern-cape

@tiwane - I tried merging these together, but it results in a timeout 504 error for me. This as well as presumably the other need to be done centrally I assume.

1 Like

I found other cases
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/boyaca-co Correct
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/boyaca

https://www.inaturalist.org/places/caqueta-co Correct
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/caqueta

https://www.inaturalist.org/places/atlantico
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/atlantico-co Correct

https://www.inaturalist.org/places/valle-del-cauca--2
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/valle-del-cauca Correct

And many others

Looks like it went through, I only see https://www.inaturalist.org/places/kwazulu-natal-za now.

I removed the ones that were single points.

I have sent her a message and she dealt with the problem.

I will also bring up the following mess in my hometown:
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/modena-emilia-romagna-ita
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/modena
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/modena-it
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/modena-it--2
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/modena-it--3

Northern Cape still shows:
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/northern-cape--2 incorrect
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/northern-cape correct

also (incorrect listed first)
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/western-cape-9ac81708-ec95-4c6c-b4b0-04e80f132840
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/western-cape

https://www.inaturalist.org/places/limpopo--2
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/limpopo

https://www.inaturalist.org/places/orange-free-state
https://www.inaturalist.org/places/free-state

Related to this, in Explore > Locations, Newfoundland matches a rectangular bounding box that encompasses parts of other provinces. The best match (i.e. least surprising for a Canadian user) should be Newfoundland and Labrador Province:

There is also a Newfoundland, NF, CA Island that would be a good candidate to show near the top of the list:

However, the autocomplete doesn’t show either of the above, which I would’ve assumed would be 1st and 2nd in the list.

As for cleaning up duplicated / useless places, there are these point locations with 0 observations:

I’ll follow up with icbryson, the creator of both places, about this.in private message.

And there are these also:

The checklists seem to be subtly different, and most projects reference the second one (with the larger checklist) vs. the 1st one (only one project). I don’t know what to suggest to the place creator (cdorsay for both) to fix this. Ideally, the project that remains should be the one without the ugly hex suffix, but I can’t see at a glance what’s different about that one that changes the checklist length. The maps look virtually identical (though I don’t know how to export / compare). Seems like it would take a lot of coordination with project admins to fix it all up. Ideas?

Ben

A post was merged into an existing topic: Search projects by place and taxa