I don’t have data on my phone, so I use the app offline in the field. I add an identification in the field, and then when I get home I manually upload the observations, and in the process identifications are automatically added.
Usually this works out great because I know to write “plants” as the placeholder and it automatically chooses Plants for the ID. However, sometimes it doesn’t work out perfectly; here I put “salmon” (which works as both singular and plural, and I incorrectly assumed it would refer to a valid taxonomical group) and it chose Eastern Australian Salmon because “Salmon” is one of the common names that’s been added to that species.
When identifying Unknown observations, I sometimes see observations with placeholders such as “plant”, “tree” or “mushroom”. This makes sense because the person is looking at a single plant/fungus, so adding “Plants” or “Fungi” isn’t intuitive, and they’re not going to know that “tree” (or even “trees”) isn’t a valid taxonomic identification. However, these aren’t given identifications because those taxa don’t have matching common names (for good reason; there are lots of plants that aren’t trees…).
I don’t know if this is a big enough deal to worry about; these situations might only be a small proportion of the overall Unknown observations problem. But it is kind of annoying from the user’s perspective, and if there are enough observations like these to make it significant, what would the solution be?
Using the current system it would require adding common names to “Plants” and “Fungi” that aren’t actually synonyms, and removing “Salmon” from a species that might live where there aren’t any other salmon for that name to refer to (I don’t know if that’s actually the case here). But I don’t think that’s ideal…