Forpus xanthopterygius is listed as Endangered in iNaturalist. The correct is Least Concern.
It’s listed so because because it’s supposedly in CITES appendix, for IUCN it’s status is listed as LC, but I don’t see this species on CITES site, so you need to add a flag to the species so this status can be removed.
It should be there on CITES. The species won’t be listed individually, which may be why you didn’t find it, because the entire order Psittaciformes is listed on Appendix II (with certain exceptions of individual species explicitly listed on Appendix I).
I mean obscuration shouldn’t be there, it’s on 2 other statuses is not obscured.
I agree that it’s confusing that it is marked as “EN” but the status page for the species (https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/19069-Forpus-xanthopterygius) does show IUCN and CITES correctly.
I doubt that putting “Appendix II” instead of EN would be clearer, so it’s probably the best way to approach a confusing situation.
The end result of obscuration is correct though.
In CITES Appendix II:
“PSITTACIFORMES spp. (Except the
species included in Appendix I and
Agapornis roseicollis, Melopsittacus
undulatus, Nymphicus hollandicus and
Psittacula krameri, which are not
included in the Appendices)”
If you find an issue with a taxon, please flag it - the forum isn’t a place to discuss specific issues with a taxon. To flag a taxon, go to its page (eg https://www.inaturalist.org/taxa/19069-Forpus-xanthopterygius), click on Curation, then select Flag for Curation.
Looks like maybe someone misinterpreted what being included in CITES means and mistakenly added it?
Species listed in CITES for trade restrictions are not necessarily threatened or endangered at the moment. Their trade may be restricted for a variety of other reasons. Forpus xanthopterygius is included in Appendix II, and here is what CITES says about Appendix II:
Appendix II lists species that are not necessarily now threatened with extinction but that may become so unless trade is closely controlled. It also includes so-called “look-alike species”, i.e. species whose specimens in trade look like those of species listed for conservation reasons (see Article II, paragraph 2 of the Convention). International trade in specimens of Appendix-II species may be authorized by the granting of an export permit or re-export certificate. No import permit is necessary for these species under CITES (although a permit is needed in some countries that have taken stricter measures than CITES requires). Permits or certificates should only be granted if the relevant authorities are satisfied that certain conditions are met, above all that trade will not be detrimental to the survival of the species in the wild. (See Article IV of the Convention)
I wonder if someone was reading over the CITES document lists a bit quickly and misinterpreted the language notes for the documents (EN for the documents being written in English) as referring to the conservation status of the species instead.
Other than iNat I don’t see any source (including CITES) that actually lists the species as Endangered.
Status was added in 2018 by @loarie with update in 2020, but not sure if obscuration was added back then.