Add a new comment
-
Jason Sharp commented on "EOL Curators":
@Jennifer Hammock: I know a few photographers that seem to know their stuff and continue to contribute images. I believe the time saved by 'pre-trusting' their images would outweigh the time spent fixing the occasional mistakes. It seems some of the Smithsonian photos are pre-trusted and they have some errors.
-
Jennifer Hammock commented on "EOL Curators":
Hey, all! Michael just raised an interesting Trustedness question and our developers would like your feedback. Those of you who curate lots of our flickr images: are there flickr photographers whose content you always trust? Would it be useful to flag these individuals so their flickr content comes in Trusted by default? If you would use this feature, if you think this would save you 5000 trusting actions on the first day, or if you have concerns about the idea, please let us know. Thanks!
-
Cyndy Parr commented on "EOL Curators":
@George Sims: Ah, that's a collection created by a user. You can click on the "Managers" tab to see who created it -- might have been a student. You can leave a message for her in the newsfeed of the collection if you want. Maybe suggest she change the title? She didn't put a description of her collection so unclear why she collected them together.
-
George Sims commented on "EOL Curators":
@Cyndy Parr: Cyndy, http://eol.org/collections/27396 Gervasio, And "bugs" sensu George!!
-
Cyndy Parr commented on "EOL Curators":
@George Sims: George can you give us a link to the community or page that you are talking about?
-
Gervasio Carvalho commented on "EOL Curators":
@George Sims: George, "tarantulas" are INSECTA sensu Linné! Joke!
-
George Sims commented on "EOL Curators":
Although I am not a curator for the "Insect" community, I noticed that it contained the collection Theraphosidae (tarantulas), which are, of course, NOT insects.
-
-
Jennifer Groody joined the community "EOL Curators".
-
Abhay Hule commented on "EOL Curators":
@Cyndy Parr: Hi, Cyndy Parr: I will try to Identify as far as possible!!
-
Cyndy Parr commented on "EOL Curators":
I would appreciate if we have any crab experts that they take a look at this media gallery -- the best photos are all unreviewed and I'm not able to tell if they are all correctly identified: http://eol.org/pages/343925/media
-
Jennifer Hammock commented on "EOL Curators":
@Michael Wunderli: Michael, are the collections you're trying to eject contained within another community managed collection?
-
Michael Wunderli commented on "EOL Curators":
@Jason Sharp: thanks, it worked, but they still show up as featured collections.
-
Jason Sharp commented on "EOL Curators":
@Michael Wunderli: On the Managers tab for the collection, under 'Communities that can manage this collection' you should see the community that you are seeking. Select 'Remove'.
-
-
David Eickhoff commented on an older version of Adiantum capillus-veneris:
@Alan Weakley: Aloha Alan, Thank you. Years ago, this plant was given to me with the idea that it was A. capillus-veneris, which is rare on O'ahu, Hawaii. I always thought it didn't fit, but she insisted and I am no fern expert. So, I had no reason to doubt her. But revisiting "Hawai'i's Fern and Fern Allies" Daniel D. Palmer, University of Hawai'i Press, 2003, after your comment, I can see some key differences now. Anyway, I believe in correctness and have removed my photos of A. capillus-veneris for the time being. I can be contacted at dweickhoff@google.com or eickhoff@hawaii.edu Again, thank you for drawing this to my attention. Respectfully, David
-
-
Katja Schulz marked the classification from "Species 2000 & ITIS Catalogue of Life: May 2012" as preferred for "Selaginella willdenowii (Desv. ex Poir.) Baker".
-
Alan Weakley commented on an older version of Adiantum capillus-veneris:
This is not A. capillus-veneris, but instead A. tenerum or one of its relatives.
-
trobertson commented on "EOL Curators":
Hi all, @Constantine Wing Heng Lau @Cyndy Parr I will contact Discover Life but please see the DL page for that record [1] which states "decimal latitude_longitude from gazetteer ••• 41.1_-85.1". DL are automatically (and too optimistically) using a reverse geocoding to provide coordinates based on textual information on the record. The record published through GBIF [2] does not contain coordinates and the GBIF network content does not appear at first glance to be particularly problematic for that species [3]. I hope this helps explain the content you are seeing. Best wishes, Tim - Systems architect, GBIF [1] http://www.discoverlife.org/mp/20l?id=GBIF50315052&btxt=Encyclopedia+of+Life&burl=www.eol.org/pages/311781 [2] http://data.gbif.org/occurrences/50312715 [3] http://data.gbif.org/species/2435451/
