PLEASE restrict this thread to EXISTING UK Community Dictionary anomalies (mistakes?), not proposals for updates or absent names etc.
Always try to link examples
Load of ponies with interesting Scientific names Equus ferus | Species Dictionary | UK and Ireland | iSpot Nature
Plantae | Species Dictionary | UK and Ireland | iSpot Nature contains such Scientific delights as
Unidentified unbranched filamentous non-slimy green algae
Sycamore Seeds
Terrestrial Herb
Prunus seeds
Rubus seeds
Poppy seeds
Apple pips
Strawberry seeds
(Do not use) Golenkinia
Lower plants
Beech nuts
2 entries for Musci
3 Foliose algae
3 filamentous algae
Most of those are in the NHM Dictionary as well
they should ALL be in the NHM dictionary unless they have been pruned out by NHM since it was uploaded to ispot
Not all are. We found one last week that Chris removed from the local one. You have corrected, or removed one from the iSpot version. I think I can find ones that are not from the NHM version. I will try.
My interest is that we will forget plenty when it comes to helping the NHM to correct theirs.
Not sure if this is an anomaly or not. Read comments in the revised id.
Thanks. A reminder to us all to take care with Common names.
https://www.ispotnature.org/communities/uk-and-ireland/view/project/817720/ preview removed
2 occurrences of pinopsida in the Drop-down - the first yields over 1100 lovely conifers, the second NONE.
It does not appear in the Browser Tracheophyta | Species Dictionary | UK and Ireland | iSpot Nature
here is the cause Species Dictionary | Natural History Museum
See Unknown Tree | Observation | UK and Ireland | iSpot Nature. With an ID of (Plantae), why is this grouped as Other Organisms? I was hoping my agreement might move the group but this hasn’t been successful.
like Insecta and Pisces (not Aves), this has always been an issue in iSpot and has been reported, but not corrected, a number of times
It needs someone on the Coding Team to say why the Groups cannot be sorted - any ID of Insecta either as the ID or as part of the Taxonomy tree should be an Invert and not Another Organism.
The same obviously applies to Plantae but the issue was probably to do with uncertainty about Algae and perhaps certain seaweeds that are not, classically, plants.
I have asked a few time for GROUPS to be sorted, particularly Other Organisms.
@miked can explain better than me
Maërl is another of the Alphbet issues raised a few months ago (but not in this thread)
A rare occurrence which I think can be corrected easily
See https://www.ispotnature.org/communities/uk-and-ireland/view/observation/847566/
and
Phymatolithon calcareum | Species Dictionary | UK and Ireland | iSpot Nature
@Chris_Valentine ?
Beautifully fixed today, thanks @Chris_Valentine
The Common-name anomaly is common
Pick from the Common name menu and you MIGHT get into trouble
See https://www.ispotnature.org/communities/uk-and-ireland/view/observation/848346/ (comments) but there are plenty of other examples
Here, there are 552 Fly agarics but in two lists because 443 of them are to the var. and 109 to the plain name
We need the Common Name menu sorting
https://www.ispotnature.org/communities/uk-and-ireland/view/project/795587/
I think this is again only something that can be properly addressed via UKSI although possibly the projects/filters might be adjustable to gather them all.
More evidence - enough of an issue to put off beginners
https://www.ispotnature.org/communities/uk-and-ireland/view/observation/825132/
There, the common name for Acronicta aceris really should be “Sycamore moth” - similar to my recent Olive - exact same issue.
1 Like
And Acer pseudoplatanus should be Sycamore Tree?!
I suppose there could be 4 or 5 of the most common mistakes corrected in the ispot dictionary even if it will have to be done again when the dictionary is updated again.
Sycamore is one of these.
Just editing to give Sycamore moth and Sycamore tree with their links to relevant scientific names would fix this one Chris?
I would have to delete that particular identification record - changing the species entry now would not affect the identification. I think that’s an example of where the user has typed in the name but then not clicked to select from the list - hence the lower case ‘s’
Changing the dictionary entry now should mean future identifications use the correct entry.
OK by me. You would have to ask the User
Would you like ME to make an observation with the Error, then you can use mine for the Correction?
In fact I will do one in a minute and come back with a link
D
No this was an invalid ID with just sycamore (in black) as the ID. The Dictionary recode has chosen the wrong entry-link, hence the rather terse rollover banner, which should read “Taxonomically mistaken”. In fact it is a small error by the inexperienced user, greatly enhanced by the Dictionary code which, incidentally, is still brilliant Chris!