I think that observations ID'ed to the family level should be considered for research grade

[upupa-epops]

I’d want to add at least a couple other categories beyond that to split up “Casual” haha. [higher taxa and can’t be ID’d further] seems like yet another in this list:

@upupa-epops

Yeah, to me what seems like a big issue here is that [non-wild] and [no evidence] and [missing metadata] are all lumped together in the Casual “bad observations” bin. Not just that some of them don’t show up as Needs ID. Only the [missing metadata] ones are really “bad observations”. The others are less preferred, but still potentially valuable and there’s nothing wrong with them.