Identification, Images, & Information
For Insects, Spiders & Their Kin
For the United States & Canada
Clickable Guide
Moths Butterflies Flies Caterpillars Flies Dragonflies Flies Mantids Cockroaches Bees and Wasps Walkingsticks Earwigs Ants Termites Hoppers and Kin Hoppers and Kin Beetles True Bugs Fleas Grasshoppers and Kin Ticks Spiders Scorpions Centipedes Millipedes

Sponsor
The Coleopterists Society supports BugGuide.

Calendar
Upcoming Events

Discussion of 2018 gathering

Photos of insects and people from the 2015 gathering in Wisconsin, July 10-12

Photos of insects and people from the 2014 gathering in Virginia, June 4-7.

Photos of insects and people from the 2013 gathering in Arizona, July 25-28

Photos of insects and people from the 2012 gathering in Alabama

Photos of insects and people from the 2011 gathering in Iowa

Photos from the 2010 Workshop in Grinnell, Iowa

Photos from the 2009 gathering in Washington

Queues for experts

BugGuide would be fairer if we had queues for experts, rather than our "Images" or "Recent Images" views. As it is now, images are processed Last-In-First-Out. The newest images are on the first page. If your image is 2 or 3 pages back and the expert doesn't get to you, the next time that expert visits you may be on page 5 or 6. Before you know it you are on page 100, still waiting for an ID, meanwhile images just submitted today are on page 1 and getting the expert's attention. I have seen people dump a bunch of images into Frass and get immediate attention to save their images, I have seen people delete and resubmit images to get back to page 1. This shouldn't be necessary.

It would be fairer if we had a First-In-First-Out view that the experts could use to view unidentified images. Then the backlog would apply to everyone equally. Also, if everyone could see where they were in the queue, they would at least have some idea if/when they might finally get some comment.

I suppose this could be accomplished by having a view that reversed the order of the images, showing the oldest first. Then as the images were moved into the guide, the next oldest would move to the first page.

I just think this image on page 125 and all of those on page 124, 123, 122, might be more deserving of a response than those just submitted yesterday.


EDIT: Placing this comment at the top so it is seen as the topic of this discussion...

As it is now, If you go to "Moths" and click "Images" you see the very NEWEST images. If you then click "recent images" you see everything mixed up at any taxonomic level, including those already IDed to species. I would simply like to see an additional link next to "recent images" called "oldest images" which showed the "Images" view, but instead the database query returned the images in the reverse order, so that the oldest images were on page 1. This way experts could see the images from 2008 without clicking 30 times to work their way to page 125. Also, people waiting for IDs could see how far back in the "queue" they were and have some idea when they might receive a comment/ID. As it is now those images are just ignored until they really back up, then someone dumps them into superfamilies to give people a sense of progress.

maybe
being able to be click on any 'rank' and 'recent' would be helpful - idea being that you could select any order, family, subfamily, etc and see all images at that rank or below in submission order. That way you'd get images out of ID request to lowest rank known and anyone wishing to look at that group could do so with less clutter at a later date.

 
Are there ranks
that can't be viewed in this way by using the "recent images" link? Every one I tried seemed to work.

 
As it is now
If you go to "Moths" and click "Images" you see the very NEWEST images. If you then click "recent images" you see everything mixed up at any taxonomic level, including those already IDed to species. I would simply like to see an additional link next to "recent images" called "oldest images" which showed the "Images" view, but instead the database query returned the images in the reverse order, so that the oldest images were on page 1. This way experts could see the images from 2008 without clicking 30 times to work their way to page 125. Also, people waiting for IDs could see how far back in the "queue" they were and have some idea when they might receive a comment/ID. As it is now those images are just ignored until they really back up, then someone dumps them into superfamilies to give people a sense of progress.

 
I understand what you're looking for...
... and I agree that it would be most helpful. It just seemed to me that the capability Phillip was asking about was already available.

 
user defined filters/sorts
I see what you're suggesting, maybe also make it possible to sort by reverse submission order and rank. If you hit Moths - you'd get the older submissions at highest rank first - oldest image with least level of ID to most recent at species.

Sounds like what we really need is a spreadsheet type of user defined sort [multi level with ascending/descending order option] and maybe filter [taxa, date, region, etc.]. I have no idea how difficult this would be to implement, but it would appear some version [hard coded] is already used.


 
Settings
Having settings in a users account would be nice, but I suspect that creating a new field in the user account database, and changing the account edit page, IN ADDITION to doing the new view would be a large job. I think adding a link for "oldest images" (like we already have for "caterpillars" "adults" "both" "recent images") would probably be a simpler job. A link would also allow people to switch views at will without editing their account page.

 
??
Maybe I don't know how it works - I would like to hit Coleoptera or Scarabaeidae and browse all images in submission order at that rank or below. Hitting 'recent' appears to only show images in submission order without any filtering.

 
If I browse to Scarabaeidae,
then click on "Images," and then select the "recent images" link at the top of the page (not the tab, but the link under the family name), I get this. Isn't that what you were looking for?

 
Yes, Thanks
I didn't realize you could do that!

Yes, this has been a puzzle.
A couple similar thoughts have been on our mind:
First with leafhoppers and planthoppers and treehoppers. We all invariably wait on most for confirmation from Dr Hamilton, but meanwhile the images could be moved to ten different places in the guide, Suborder, Superfamily, Family, etc. Should we discuss this with him and set up a single Dr Hamilton Page where all the images waiting for him are located? There would probably be quite a few images put there that he could then tell us somehow that they should be frassed. As it is now they just sit there deep in the guide as Max points out above.

Second, we have been working on the Geometrid caterpillars with Tom Murray. When we finish with everything we can figure out and frass all those we think no one will figure out, there will be this group of images that need expert help. We would hate to have those get mixed in with the new geometrids that get posted. Can there be a page that says we are looking for an expert to check out these geometrid caterpillars rather than have one stop by and do the most recent ones, many of which we might be able to do ourselves?

The same thing is true for spiders that we work on with Lynette. Right now we put new ones on the Order Araneae page. If we can't figure them out we move them to No Taxon Entelegynes page and try to keep the Infraorder Araneomorphae page empty, but how would anyone other than us know that? The Entelegynes page is really a "we need an expert bad here" page.

Finally, we not only have the problem Max lists above, but it is compounded by images moved partway into the guide. Does a visiting expert know that there are 24 more pages of unidentified moths on the Family Geometridae pages, 12 pages under Superfamily Noctuoidea, and 32 more pages under Family Noctuidae?

 
Moving partway: good or bad?
I saw so many complaints about the unmanageable size of ID Request that I don't put images there unless they baffle me (e.g., this larva might be sawfly or moth). That means putting images in sections for individual taxa. Often it's a moth or a caterpillar. What should submitters do with those?

Maybe experts looked at some of the old photos on the back pages and couldn't ID them, so they're still there.

 
Info here

 
Moth pages
As I remember it the moth images got so backed up a few years ago the images got dumped (sorted) to Geometridae/Noctuoidea/etc. to make Moths "better". But without experts in those areas attending to those specialties, maybe we really just hid the mess and made it harder to eventually deal with them?

 
Not really
In addition to "hiding the mess", this also broke it up into smaller blocks- still messy, but more manageable. It also made it easier to work with new additions to "Moths".

While it wasn't anywhere near a solution to the problem, it was definitely helpful.

 
How does it
make it easier to work with new additions to "Moths"? Experts still give those images on page 1 IDs and those images on page 125 are ignored rather than those on page 300 being ignored. I just think it would be "fairer" if the older images were given IDs before those images submitted yesterday. I would like to see a tool that made that easier to do.

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click 'Save settings' to activate your changes.