Yes, there were a few I think 5 where the Likely ID was Polydesmus fungus and photo was of millipede. Hope that was okay. I seem to remember from a couple of years ago this genus name coming up in context of unelaborated same name in dictionary, but that was before the last dictionary update I think.
These were the ones where I added an invert Polydesmus ID :
That includes your one with the lovely photo.
had been changed by HB and I agreed, shifting banner
.
There are a couple of observations that are multi-species and made by group/individual who joined in 2013 and have had no activity since then. Regular contributors had communicated with them re these observations but there was no response and the various images in each of the observations included a millipede. I wondered if these ones might be considered for deletion? The last two of the ones listed above.
Off out just now, please let me know if there’s anything I should be doing or should not have done, just say! M
Yes I see I was confused, what you are doing is fine, it is just those two awkward ones with lots of agreements to the fungus that are causing the problem
Good work here Maggs49
This was noted in 2018 and NO-ONE took any notice https://www.ispotnature.org/communities/uk-and-ireland/view/observation/757895/
There are two Genera in the Master Dictionary and that is NOT required to add a suffix
So we need people to be vigilent when making an Ob. We all need to look back when completing an ID to see if anything is worng
The best solution is to intervene in the Browser
And we need MUCH more USER help with this issue
Wrote the above in a hurry this morning - the one that HB Helen had IDed nicely as millipede following heavy duty agreements to Polydesmus fungus still remains to be shifted to an invert, more agreements please!
The main reason it is staying in fungi at moment is my reputatoin in fungi but several of the people who have agreed with the invert ID have a lot of reputation in inverts so may only take a couple more people with good invert reputation to get this as the likely ID.
I am not wholly against deletion (some are) but Observations like this are valuble for site developers, or rather those who want to help site developers.
Also it is a bit out of order to delete Observation that have a potentially valuable comment and ID trail.
I beleve we need to train ouselves to see these issues the moment we create them - THEN would be a good time for deletion and to note the experience in the Forum
In general I agree. But here we have an ID which the expert to created it now recognises to be wrong, largely because of a dictionary problem. While it’s always good to see that experts can make mistakes too (!), perhaps this one has had most of the learning sucked out of it and steps should be in hand to correct the underlying problem. Given that it will be difficult, if not impossible, to swing the likely ID to the correct version, perhaps this might be a case where deletion and re-posting may be a way of ridding the site of an incorrect ID. It is a balance between learning from mistakes and keeping the site as error-free as possible. I would probably favour error-free but I appreciate that others might not.
Fundimental flaws and protocol
I am not certain that everyone understands the flaws that are evident here and that should be preserved, at least temporarily.
Firstly, despite Expert agrements to IDs, second IDs should usually take precedence over first ones. They are not always going to be right but they are usually based on re-consideration or strong opinions,
There are some striking examples
.
We can see how flawed it really is because had Mike changed his mind in minutes, he would still have not have caried the Banner - that is a serious flaw of protocol. Second IDs by the User should take precedence.
Secondly, those of us who wish to influence the Banner’s position here, CANNOT because our agreements are linked to our Fungus reputations - THAT is a more serious flaw of protocol.
And, the user should have the facility to change the GROUP - that might immediately fix the issue here.
Finally, and a VERY good reason for retaining the Observation, is that the Curator MUST have power too override any- and everything in iSpot. If that should be done by committee, then fine. The commitee here has already been convened.
Actually, this will shift quite quickly, if we ask for help. Very few regular users are involved and we have shifted banners in much worse examples. I have asked for help in my signature - will others see it? **
.
I think we should retain this Observation as a record of how it used to be back in 2023 and has been since 2010.
.
** or would have been had I not Crashed the site at 21:30
a dictionary update is being tested
I will add more of these (anyone can): doing so will help the testers
There are two Entries in the Drop-down for Annelida (Segmented worms) one has no other Observations, the other 864
.
This is from the NHM dictionary
These issues probably persist in the New Dictionary (currently under test)
Once again, I am asking for lists to be rationalised and ‘correct’ ones to be given a suffix
As the dictionary is being tested NOW, it would be good if we had more notifications of these (please)
It really does not matter if they have been notified before. If you find one please add it here
The Auger shell part of the dictionary, or maybe my understanding are a bit confused. According to WORMS and MARLIN the Auger shell is: Turritellinella tricarinata. This exists in the dictonary. However, most of the observations are in Turritella commis, which according to WORMS is an unaccepted synonym.
.
There is also a dead end of Turritella in Turritella.
there are plenty of cases where synonyms are used in different sites, as correct names.
WoRMS is reliable but not always the same as the NHM dictionary (ours)
It is essential we stick with the entries in our own Dictionary, so a little research is often needed.
What is supposed to happen, when Taxonomists decide, is the NHM Dictionary gets updated.
Unfortunately it takes iSpot quite a while to update its own version - there is no auti updating and the actual update is complex
Currently a NEW version of iSpot’s is being tested, I am helping. I think it is already out of date, like all dictionaries!
