Using the url to search for multiple observation ids doesn't seem to work

Please fill out the following sections to the best of your ability, it will help us investigate bugs if we have this information at the outset. Screenshots are especially helpful, so please provide those if you can.

Website
Chrome

An example link from here
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/how-to-use-inaturalists-search-urls-wiki-part-2-of-2/18792
to search for multiple observation IDs produces zero results. The link from that page that does not work is
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?id=51170811,51170806

Description of problem (please provide a set of steps we can use to replicate the issue, and make as many as you need.):

Step 1: Try to go to this url https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?id=51170811,51170806

Step 2: See if it works

Step 3:

You need to change the filters to allow RG observations.
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?quality_grade=needs_id%2Cresearch&id=51170811%2C51170806

1 Like

Thank you. Can you tell me why this doesn’t work?
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/identify?quality_grade=needs_id%2Cresearch&id=123773394%2C124028738

You’ll need to add the filter “Reviewed” = Any

1 Like

Thanks again. That worked for observations. Is there a way to do something similar, as in filtering to a list of IDs, in batch edit?

And I wonder why there’s an example in that document that does not work.

I’m not quite sure what kind of scenario you’re asking for - e.g. there isn’t a way on the website to batch edit your identifications on other people’s observations. If you want to batch edit your own observations, hover over your profile pic in the top right of the header and choose “Edit Observations”, then filter it to your search interest, and “Batch edit”.

The example you referenced “works” in the context of the Identify page, which defaults to Needs ID/unreviewed obs, but I changed it to use Explore instead, which might reduce confusion. https://www.inaturalist.org/pages/search+urls#obs-id

1 Like

see https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/search-by-location-accuracy-under-edit-observations-batch-edit/21399/5

by the way… there doesn’t seem to be an actual bug in this thread. you may wan to change the topic category to General instead of Bug Report.

That is what I needed. I have a list of IDs of a subset of my observations that I want to batch edit.

I guess you are correct that the issue is that the examples in that document are incorrect rather than there being an actual bug.

Thank you. Sorry if I wasn’t clear. I have a list of observation IDs for records that I want to batch edit. Looks like I have an answer now though.

I made a corresponding change in the Forum tutorial wiki. The example should work now.

Also clarified (I hope) the note pertaining to “hidden” default filters, and replicated the note in part 2 of the Forum tutorial.

3 Likes

Thank you very much!

Can you tell me how to search by a custom field as well as order_by said field? This works with one ID, but not multiple.

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?field:IH_Box_Turtle_ID=0010,0011&quality_grade=any&reviewed=any&verifiable=any&place_id=any

This gives me results, but not ordered by that field.

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?user_id=dt_almquist&quality_grade=any&reviewed=any&verifiable=any&place_id=any&order_by=field:ih_box_turtle_id

i don’t think that’s an option within the system. you could export the results and then sort yourself.

Thank you. I was hoping to sort within iNat to see the images grouped together.

without creating some sort of interface for yourself via the API, the best you can do is you can view observations for one obs field value at a time. ex: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?verifiable=any&place_id=any&field:IH_Box_Turtle_ID=0025

Yes, this is what I’ve been doing, and a friend of mine used (I think) your basic idea on another thread relating to creating custom field guides to do a type of html mail merge of downloaded image urls to put them on his wordpress site, but it seemed logical in my optimistic little head that there’d be a way to sort by a field.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.