I’ve come across an observation that has 5 photos. Four of them have bird A and one of them has bird B. Each photo is a single species. People identified the observation as bird A, even though it’s clear that bird B is part of the observation for now. It’s got at least two identifiers who have agreed on bird A, so it’s research grade. This seems wrong since bird B is clearly in this series for now. I made a comment about bird B. So did one of the other identifiers. I feel like they shouldn’t have made the identification as long as bird B was part of the observation. What to do?
ID at a taxon which fits A and B.
Then use the DQA - Not a single subject - which makes it Casual - until the observer splits it to A and B.
Leave a comment so you get notified - and can withdraw your ‘Casual’ vote.
4 Likes
make the observer aware that there is a mixup. he/she/they alone can fix it. in case the observer doesn*t fix it you can use the data quality assessment and give it a 
for: Evidence related to a single subject
3 Likes
Thanks, y’all.
3 Likes
For a scenario where almost all photos are of one organism and ONLY one image doesn’t match AND it’s a user who has been active recently/more than once, I tend to leave a comment as it might have been a mistake when adding the images. Then if they reply back or add an ID, I get a notification and can return and add an ID at that point. If someone else runs into this and the user never responds, it can get marked with DQA at that time.
If it’s a user that hasn’t been active in a while (think 2-3+ years), I’ll often leave a comment and mark as “Not a single subject” right away since it’s unlikely to get fixed.
1 Like