There are a few possibilities depending on how well-versed you are in the group and how much effort you want to put into it. Several arthropod groups have had this same issue. I would presume that delving through all species globally wouldn’t be feasible now, though.
If you know it’s not a particular species but aren’t sure which one it is, you can add a disagreeing ID at the level you’re most confident it is (clicking the orange button instead of the green button). I do this a lot with green lacewing observations (“this lacks trait A for that genus, but trait B means it’s at least in this tribe”). For a few taxa, I’ve saved a sort of boilerplate message that I paste into IDs to note the particular identification issues with that group. I also really recommend @-tagging the identifiers (especially when it’s a top identifier) to hopefully prevent misidentification in the future (often with a friendly reminder to be familiar with a species’ range, diagnostic traits, and similar species).
Of course, the more misidentified records there are, the more difficult this can become. These also tend to re-populate, especially when there are few alternatives that Computer Vision suggests.