Problem with "Identify" function

This has likely been brought up before but when Identifying submissions from the “Identify” tab, after you get a few pages in you start seeing the same ones over and over mixed in with some you haven’t seen before. After you get 6-8 pages in most of the submissions on the page are ones you have seen multiple times before. If I couldn’t identify a photo the first 10 times I saw it, it is unlikely I will be able to on the 11th time. Besides being aggravating it wastes time.

If you check the “reviewed” box below the observation photo, you won’t be presented with this one again. I do that if the photo is clearly hopeless (completely blurred etc). But I would prefer to see unidentified ones again for another round with a different mindset, so I don’t check most of them.


Do you click on “reviewed” or “review the page”? These sometimes take time to load, but you shouldn’t get old mixed with new.

1 Like

this isn’t really a bug. if you’re sorting the observations by date submitted descending (newest first), then observations will naturally get pushed lower and lower down the list as newer observations are submitted.

as the others have mentioned, marking observations as reviewed and then excluding reviewed observations from your identification set is probably the best way to avoid seeing the same observations again and again.

alternatively, you could sort the page by date submitted ascending (oldest first), and that should also allow you to work through the list without seeing the same observations again, since new observations will be added to the end of the list.

for me, since i don’t identify a ton of observations, sometimes i will add &order_by=random to the webpage URL to have the page sort observations in a random order, and this offers a mix of recent and old observations. if there are a lot of observations in the set, then this also has the effect of minimizing the number of “repeat” observations, even if i don’t mark observations i’ve looked at as reviewed.

1 Like

I’m closing at posters have answered the question and provided solutions (thanks to all!) and it isn’t a bug.