Catherine Sutera

The EOL Profile Newsfeed contains comments left for its owner by other members, EOL Community invitations, and gathers updates associated with the items in the owner's EOL watch list.

Add a new comment

  • Profile picture of Michаel Frаnkis who took this action.

    Michаel Frаnkis commented on "EOL Curators":

    @Yan Wong: I've noticed similar mixed ordering on several pages with some Trusted below some Unreviewed, though never with Unreviewed right at the top like this

    10 days ago

  • Profile picture of Yan Wong who took this action.

    Yan Wong commented on "EOL Curators":

    The media on this page http://eol.org/pages/132695/media are in a weird order, with a load of unreviewed ones first, then the trusted ones after. Is there something up with the system?

    11 days ago

  • Profile picture of Yan Wong who took this action.

    Yan Wong commented on "EOL Curators":

    @Jennifer Hammock: Yes, I think any encouragement to get these images trusted would be very helpful

    11 days ago

  • Profile picture of Jennifer Hammock who took this action.

    Jennifer Hammock commented on "EOL Curators":

    @Yan Wong: I select unreviewed images as exemplars regularly. I like to think that the added visibility gets some of them noticed by curators and Trusted, too, but I haven't checked. A collection is a good idea, but I wonder if a "best Unreviewed images on EOL" collection would be more useful than an Untrusted exemplar collection. That way any member could help point out great images in need of Trusting...

    11 days ago

  • Profile picture of Yan Wong who took this action.
    Yan Wong added an unknown item to the collection "Misplaced EOL Content".

    11 days ago

  • Profile picture of Yan Wong who took this action.
  • Profile picture of Yan Wong who took this action.
    Yan Wong added "File:USDA petit pan squash.jpg" to the collection "Misplaced EOL Content".

    12 days ago

  • Profile picture of Yan Wong who took this action.
    Yan Wong added "Image of Algae" to the collection "Misplaced EOL Content".

    12 days ago

  • Profile picture of Yan Wong who took this action.

    Yan Wong commented on "EOL Curators":

    @Cyndy Parr: I certainly wouldn't trust an image if I wasn't sure of the ID, simply to make it "rise to the top". I wonder if a good use of review time for EoL interns (or whoever) would be to look through all images deliberately set by a curator as an exemplar but which are unreviewed. There can't be that many of them, and I assume they are cases where a suitable reviewed image is poor. It might be useful if there was an automatically generated collection of these.

    12 days ago

  • Profile picture of Cyndy Parr who took this action.

    Cyndy Parr commented on "EOL Curators":

    @Yan Wong: My opinion is that it is okay, especially for species that will have images that are almost impossible to trust. I'd rather see an exemplar marked as unreviewed, than trusted just to justify it as an exemplar, if that makes sense. Here's an example: http://eol.org/pages/311512/ The 2 trusted images are not very high quality, and an unreviewed image is much better and looks very much like the trusted images.

    12 days ago

  • Profile picture of Yan Wong who took this action.

    Yan Wong commented on "EOL Curators":

    Is it OK to pick unreviewed images as exemplars? For example, the only actual picture (rather than drawing) of human fleas is a microscope photo (by an EoL regular, as it happens), but it is not yet trusted: http://eol.org/pages/704391/media

    12 days ago

  • Profile picture of Jeremy Rice who took this action.

    Jeremy Rice commented on "EOL Curators":

    This comment was deleted.

    14 days ago • deleted: 14 days ago

  • Profile picture of Yan Wong who took this action.

    Yan Wong commented on "EOL Curators":

    @Jeremy Rice: Ah, great, thanks. Apologies for posting this in curators, BTW, I intended to post it in EoL API discussion group: http://eol.org/communities/121/newsfeed

    15 days ago

  • Profile picture of Jeremy Rice who took this action.

    Jeremy Rice commented on "EOL Curators":

    @Katja Schulz: As KS said, it actually *is* available; it's 1347. It just has a funny name, so you cannot tell. ...But that's really the hierarchy.

    15 days ago

  • Profile picture of Katja Schulz who took this action.

    Katja Schulz commented on "EOL Curators":

    @Yan Wong: oh, and if it helps in the meantime, the current hierarchy id for IRMNG is 1347, so you should be able to get the root taxa like this: http://eol.org/api/hierarchies/1.0/1347.json?cache_ttl=

    15 days ago

  • Profile picture of Katja Schulz who took this action.

    Katja Schulz commented on "EOL Curators":

    @Yan Wong: It looks like this is a bug. IRMNG is supposed to be supported as a hierarchy provider. I'll report it. Hopefully, it will be an easy fix.

    15 days ago

  • Profile picture of Yan Wong who took this action.

    Yan Wong commented on "EOL Curators":

    @Bob Corrigan: Here's another example where the image is currently the exemplar, even though the discussion on the page implies a different exemplar was deliberately set: http://eol.org/data_objects/26853984

    15 days ago

  • Profile picture of Yan Wong who took this action.

    Yan Wong commented on "EOL Curators":

    Any idea why IRMNG isn't supported as a hierarchy provider in http://eol.org/api/docs/provider_hierarchies ? I'm trying to map OpenTree identifiers onto EoL page IDs (http://eol.org/forums/8/topics/93/posts/306) and it seems if I use GBIF, NCBI, IndexFungorum and IRMNG, I can find 99.97 % of the OpenTree species on EoL.

    15 days ago

  • Profile picture of Bob Corrigan who took this action.

    Bob Corrigan commented on "EOL Curators":

    @Michаel Frаnkis: Michael and Kate - I'm reluctant to make blanket statements, but I can safely say that you and other curators should always exercise your best judgment when choosing photos. Where a choice exists, I would invite you to choose a photo that embraces both scientific accuracy and aesthetic quality. Per Michael's comment in para3, this is information we would very much like to see associated with taxon pages - let's talk about the best way to do that. ***As always, thanks for everything you do for EOL***

    18 days ago

  • Profile picture of Michаel Frаnkis who took this action.

    Michаel Frаnkis commented on "EOL Curators":

    I'd say we should select known wild origin, 100% of the time. Species in captivity / cultivation are frequently hybrids, or misidentified, often atypical, and do not show the taxon in its natural environment. Even where the species (as currently defined) may be obvious, subspecies usually won't be known; this leads to problems with time as subspecies are shown by further research to be distinct species, and the photos change from 'species identified' to 'unidentified'.

    Case in point: the Ptilopsis owls of Africa. These were formerly regarded as a single species, Ptilopsis leucotis, but this was recently split into two species, Ptilopsis leucotis in the northern subtropics, and Ptilopsis granti in the southern subtropics. The two species are easily identified in the wild by location and vocally, but are visually indistinguishable. Ptilopsis owls are common in captivity, and most are labelled Ptilopsis leucotis, though many (most?) of them are actually likely to be Ptilopsis granti due to its greater accessibility to markets. So captive specimens of Ptilopsis are not identifiable, and quite simply can't be trusted.

    To draw a similar parallel, directly relevant to what you say: we have a few photos from the wild of Ailurus fulgens which are of mediocre photographic quality (camera trap results), and dozens of photos from zoos, many of high photographic quality. But not one of the zoo photos is identified to either source location or to subspecies (A. f. fulgens in the Himalaya, A. f. styani in SW China). If future research shows a deep genetic divide between the two subspecies (or even between other as-yet un-named populations) and thus a species split (very possible, even likely, given the barriers to migration in the deep valleys of the area), then every single one of those zoo photos becomes worthless as just unidentified Ailurus sp. (as they already are unidentifiable to subspecies), and might as well be deleted.

    This can even affect species which one might think to be no-brainer identifications: how many captive specimens of Loxodonta africana might actually turn out to be Loxodonta cyclotis misnamed? Answer: probably not many, but we don't, and effectively can't, know precisely.

    19 days ago