Previous disagreeing ID erroneously overturned

Website, Chrome.

Something strange has happened with Sarcophaga carnaria. A few months ago I went through all the Australian ones and took them back to genus or family with explicit disagreements.

I happened to correct another one today and looked at the map; heaps had popped up again for not only Australia, but globally. Turns out all of the disagreements have somehow been reverted. Check this one out for example:
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/43017479

7 months ago I explicitly disagreed with S. carnaria and brought it back to family, but now it says my ID of Sarcophagidae is disagreeing with Sarcophagidae (???), and disagreement has been overriden.

I know there was a recent change with this group (creating a complex taxon?); perhaps the issue is related to https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/adding-id-of-taxon-results-in-comment-stating-ider-disagrees-with-that-taxon/18101 and https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/unintended-consequence-of-taxon-change/9725

There are now hundreds of S. carnaria records that, having already been fixed, need to be changed again

1 Like

@jonathan142 @treegrow @edanko

I’ve been seeing this as well as of the past week or so. They’re also not responding to the usual DQA trick (where checking and unchecking something causes the IDs to sort of re-synch - usually used for very old records before disagreeing IDs were a thing). I recall several minor ID synch issue with the taxon over the past few years, but they seemed to be just delays at the time.

Were there any recent taxonomic changes? This happened with many of my ids that disagreed with Aquarius remigis after I moved it from genus Aquarius into Complex Aquarius remigis

1 Like

That sounds like the exact situation. A complex was added not terribly long ago.

When I’ve seen weird things like this happening because of taxon changes, deactivating and reactivating the taxa can fix things. Sometimes you have to deactivate the parent too which can be a pain depending on how many children it has and sometimes you have to do it more than once. But that’s fixed issues I’ve had before when creating complexes. Not sure if that’s super helpful or not but maybe helpful information to have out there.

@mpintar do you have URLs of any examples?

I would’ve had a lot if I hadn’t just gone back and corrected them all (probably). I’ve recently gone through Gerridae from all states except CA, but there shouldn’t be any disagreements there. Maybe if I look through some Mexican records

1 Like

Here are some:
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/8118504
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/7947405
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/6185906
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/5930544

There are probably more in Canada too.

Edit: removed the one that was an opt-out

1 Like

Those are fine, thanks!