The Problem with External Data Providers

Oct 13, 2025 by magicalceylontours.com 7 views

Introduction

As a volunteer curator on iNaturalist, I have encountered numerous instances where the "External provider" feature has failed to provide accurate and up-to-date information. This has led to frustration among users and curators alike, resulting in a significant burden on volunteers. In this article, I will highlight the issues with the current implementation of external data providers and propose a solution to update or eliminate this feature.

The Problem with External Data Providers

The "External provider" feature on iNaturalist allows users to search for taxon names from external databases. However, as I discovered in a recent case, this feature is not always reliable. I was asked to add a taxon, an Antarctic prawn, which was not a high-priority addition. However, the user requested it, and I had to verify the information. The external database, Marine Species, listed the taxon combination as created in 2011. I then checked the Catalogue of Life (CoL), which is the current external provider for this type of animal, and found that it was sourcing from ITIS rather than WoRMS. However, the same combination had been on ITIS since at least 2011.

The Limitations of CoL

CoL is the current external provider for many taxon names, but it appears to be using an imported static version from 2012. This means that it is not allowing users to import any new taxon names that have been added or updated since then. As a result, users are forced to create flags for curation, which can lead to frustration on both sides. This is not only a problem for users but also for curators, who have to deal with the consequences of outdated information.

The Consequences of Outdated Information

The use of outdated information can lead to numerous problems, including:

Needless flags for curation: Users are forced to create flags for curation, which can lead to frustration on both sides.
Confusion and frustration: Users may become confused about why subsequent name changes happen, and curators may have to deal with the consequences of outdated information.
Burden on volunteers: Curators have to deal with the consequences of outdated information, which can lead to a significant burden on volunteers.

A Call for Update or Elimination

Given the limitations and consequences of the current implementation of external data providers, I believe that it is time to update or eliminate this feature. Here are some possible solutions:

Update CoL to use a dynamic version: CoL could be updated to use a dynamic version of the data, which would allow users to import new taxon names and combinations.
Use a different external provider: A different external provider could be used, such as WoRMS or ITIS, which may provide more up-to-date information.
Eliminate the external provider feature: The external provider feature could be eliminated altogether, and users could be forced to rely on the iNaturalist database for taxon names.

Conclusion

The current implementation of external data providers on iNaturalist is flawed and can lead to frustration among users and curators alike. I believe that it is time to update or eliminate this feature to provide a better experience for users and to reduce the burden on volunteers. I hope that this article will spark a discussion about the future of external data providers on iNaturalist.

External Resources

Marine Species: An external database that provides information about marine species, including taxon combinations.
Catalogue of Life (CoL): An external provider that provides information about taxon names, including combinations.
ITIS: An external database that provides information about taxon names, including combinations.
External Data Providers: A Q&A Article =============================================

Introduction

In our previous article, we discussed the issues with the current implementation of external data providers on iNaturalist. We highlighted the limitations and consequences of using outdated information and proposed a solution to update or eliminate this feature. In this article, we will answer some frequently asked questions about external data providers and provide more information about the proposed solution.

Q: What is the current implementation of external data providers on iNaturalist?

A: The current implementation of external data providers on iNaturalist allows users to search for taxon names from external databases. However, as we discussed in our previous article, this feature is not always reliable. The external database, Catalogue of Life (CoL), is the current external provider for many taxon names, but it appears to be using an imported static version from 2012.

Q: Why is the use of outdated information a problem?

A: The use of outdated information can lead to numerous problems, including:

Needless flags for curation: Users are forced to create flags for curation, which can lead to frustration on both sides.
Confusion and frustration: Users may become confused about why subsequent name changes happen, and curators may have to deal with the consequences of outdated information.
Burden on volunteers: Curators have to deal with the consequences of outdated information, which can lead to a significant burden on volunteers.

Q: What are the possible solutions to update or eliminate the external data provider feature?

A: There are several possible solutions to update or eliminate the external data provider feature, including:

Update CoL to use a dynamic version: CoL could be updated to use a dynamic version of the data, which would allow users to import new taxon names and combinations.
Use a different external provider: A different external provider could be used, such as WoRMS or ITIS, which may provide more up-to-date information.
Eliminate the external provider feature: The external provider feature could be eliminated altogether, and users could be forced to rely on the iNaturalist database for taxon names.

Q: What are the benefits of updating or eliminating the external data provider feature?

A: The benefits of updating or eliminating the external data provider feature include:

Improved accuracy: Users will have access to more accurate and up-to-date information about taxon names.
Reduced frustration: Users will no longer have to deal with the consequences of outdated information, and curators will no longer have to deal with the burden of outdated information.
Simplified curation: Curators will no longer have to deal with the consequences of outdated information, and users will no longer have to create flags for curation.

Q: How can users provide feedback about the external data provider feature?

A: Users can provide feedback about the external data provider feature by:

Commenting on the forum post: Users can comment on the forum post "External-providers-time-for-an-update" to provide feedback about the external data provider feature.
Reporting bugs: Users can report bugs with the search external name providers feature by creating a new forum post.
Contacting iNaturalist staff: Users can contact iNaturalist staff directly to provide feedback about the external data provider feature.

Conclusion

The current implementation of external data providers on iNaturalist is flawed and can lead to frustration among users and curators alike. We believe that it is time to update or eliminate this feature to provide a better experience for users and to reduce the burden on volunteers. We hope that this Q&A article has provided more information about the proposed solution and has sparked a discussion about the future of external data providers on iNaturalist.

External Resources

Marine Species: An external database that provides information about marine species, including taxon combinations.
Catalogue of Life (CoL): An external provider that provides information about taxon names, including combinations.
ITIS: An external database that provides information about taxon names, including combinations.