OK, can you tell me more about this function? I have seen it but am not sure I understand its best use.
For example, there are lovely, metallic green bees in my garden, Euglossa. I observe one and upload it at Euglossa. In fairly short order, a fellow named Jorge Mérida, who works at ECOSUR in Chiapas and who is the MX bee expert and John Ascher, who is just the bee expert, add their identifications, also Euglossa. (They both review my bees rather quickly, as part of their regular sweeps.) But it is still at Genus level so not RG.
I cannot imagine it being refined to species because of the skillset of the two who review my bees, nor does it need to be for what they are assessing. I cannot imagine it is part of anyone else’s workload. I may not even open them when I get the notifications, except for this one, recently, bc I wanted to see what John Ascher commented.
Then there are these little flies, Condylostylus. Mine almost always stay at Genus level because as one of the Fly Guys once commented, there are so many species here, including some possibly unknown as of yet. So let’s say I designate all of mine to “Cannot Be Improved” to get them off that Needs ID Stack. But now @zdanko is working on a new species and he has seen examples of it within my Condylostylus observations. So actually the ID could be improved, it just needed more time and someone young and brilliant.
Recently there was a widespread study of native bees - flowers in Mexico and all of my bees, RG and Needs ID, were included in the data set. And my Needs ID data is being included in a taxonomic revision UNAM is doing of a native species of flowering vine.
So if one knows their Needs IDs have already passed through the workflow (I am keenly aware of who does which IDs for which groups in MX) because they have already been reviewed, is there another reason to address them or is it just personal preference?