The new DQA, as I understand it, is for an observation with multiple photos that show different species, but what about observations in which different individuals of the same species, say one photo of an adult and another with a juvenile, are presented? Since the use of the DQA makes an observatio…

i’m still not a huge fan of the way the last 3 bullet points in the “please don’t vote no” section are worded – not because i have a particular strong opinion about how to handle these situations, but just because you’re not explaining what you think is not great about these situations and how you w…

Disastrous in my opinion because: it creates a relatively arbitrary way for people to decide your observation is invalid, which we already have enough of it creates retroactive confusion and concern for past observations (which can include several thousands or tens of thousands per person) it inte…

In this case I would see the photo of the reared adult as ‘evidence supporting the identification of the larva’. Having said that, I have have done exactly what you suggest - here’s a reared adult marked captive https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/102376334

Personally, I withdraw (not delete as @cthawley said) the disagreeing ID, and add another ID as appropriate (even if it is a non-disagreeing ID identical to the one I withdrew)

Great! I think we are in agreement that both approaches are valid. The approach illustrated in your example is more complex, and you need to have your i’s dotted and t’s crossed. Many iNat observers are going to find it difficult to pull that off. The other approach is less formal, and could be …

[image] silversea_starsong: can’t see any benefit to this change well, it’s moot now because: [image] loarie: staff agrees with the sentiment here that this DQA should be constrained to different species not different individuals

Both these instances Adding a photo of the same individual in the same condition even if taken later Adding a photo of genitalia dissected later are proper and have no issue to me. However, I disagree that they are analogous to a situation where multiple life stage photos have been uploaded to t…

I moved some posts discussing changes to iNat’s approach to Ancestor Disagreement to a new topic: https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/change-to-ancestor-disagreement-implementation/49276 to allow for separate conversations.

[image] rcavasin: Observer photographs adult butterfly on a flower - photo isn’t very good, making ID problematic. A week later, they add a series of photos of the spread specimen so that we can examine it more carefully. Given that the convention is to use the original place and time of coll…

Hello, I can see there are many issues about this. Nature never being clear cut. How will this affect the Hungry Parrots project where the intention was to show a bird eating various plants? Thank you Julie

New DQA: Does "Evidence related to a single subject" mean the same individual is in all photos?

General

pisum March 1, 2024, 12:02pm 90

well, it’s moot now because:

Topic		Replies	Views
"Evidence relates to one subject" DQA and photos with multiple species in them General	21	603	March 27, 2024
Reword DQA “Evidence related to a single subject” to "A single taxon is consistent in all evidence" Feature Requests	39	1234	September 30, 2024
New DQA for landscapes (with no obvious subject) General	51	787	August 23, 2026
Flesh out the description of the "Evidence related to a single subject" DQA item General	20	605	August 5, 2026
Easy way to mark multiple-species observations Feature Requests implemented	215	13583	March 24, 2024

New DQA: Does "Evidence related to a single subject" mean the same individual is in all photos?

Related topics