At this time, marking an observation “not wild” automatically removes it from the “needs ID” queue by making it “casual”. It has been suggested a number of times that those observations could be interesting to researchers, but they are also certainly interesting for the people submitting them. I suggest to make a separate category for captive organisms that does not rank the observation as “no id needed.”
I would agree a solution to this would be helpful. Currently, it must be confusing for new users, many of whom seem to be joining just to figure out what a particular houseplant or ornamental is, to have someone like me come along marking their obs as captive (welcoming them and explaining why with links of course too!) only to have their ob end up in ID no man’s land. Truth be told, I don’t know where to find other peoples’ casual obs to ID them without a taxon subscription myself ! If such users got more IDs and had more of the interactions that draw folks in perhaps that would increase overall site engagement to the benefit of the community.
Yes, I’d like to see this too. All I really need is a toggle switch on the Identify page that switches “wild only” on and off. I don’t mind if it’s “on” by default. The current filter options don’t do a good job of showing me which captive/cultivated observations still need IDs.
I’d also rather see captive/cultivated observations labelled “research grade”, perhaps as a separate “research grade-not wild” category. And I don’t mind if those are again set to off by default in observation searches.
I think this can be dealt with by better messaging and onboarding. I also think theres’ a fundamental issue in that to many people, any non-human organism is “nature” but that’s a larger issue.
To me this seems like the best solution for those who are interested in non-wild organisms. I personally have no interest in looking at observations of non-wild organisms and I think iNat’s focus should be on wild organisms but I understand the use of non-wild data and the confusion this difference may cause for newer users.
I think the bigger problem is the term “Research Grade” and the implications is has. We’ve discussed various different schema but I’m not sure any of them are improvements…Anyway that should a discussion in a more broader, non-feature request topic.
Because I don’t think iNat will make non-wild organisms appear in the Identify page by default, I’ve made an issue for adding a “Wild only” button (or something to that effect) and will close this request. This way, anyone interested in identifying non-wild organisms can easily hit that toggle.
Changing data quality labels and definitions is, I think a broader topic.
Just an update, we’ve changed Identify filters so that if you click on “Captive” “Needs ID” becomes unchecked and “Casual” is automatically checked.
So this should make it simpler for those who want to ID captive organisms specifically.