florianm
commented
5 years ago - Let's add QA status "rejected" and maybe "flagged" (as potentially wrong).
- Related to dbca-wa/tsc#55 - for all populations (TAE for one taxon and one area code) let a user choose a new taxon or area code.
- I suggest not deleting data, as the taxon might become a listed taxon again later.
TSC data visibility to staff is currently being discussed. We can hide occurrences of non-cons significant taxa (so don't have to delete data but achieve the same outcome), we can hide data below a certain QA level (e.g. only show to non-curator DBCA staff occurences with QA level "curated" and only post to NatureMap QA status "published").
I suggest we want TSC to have a form to move occurrences between pop names (area codes) or across taxa in batches (all occ of one taxon, or all occ of one area code - we already can move single occ by updating taxon or area code). Secondly, QA levels could determine visibility.
Sometimes a population is determined (through specimen re-id) to be another taxon, we need a way to re-assign the population (all occurrences for that area code) to another taxon. The other taxon may be listed or common. We don''t maintain data for common species (e.g. if there is another taxanomic change), and so would it be best to delete the population if transferred to a common species. We wouldn't be supplying data for common species and so is it only DBCA staff users that may see this data?
There are also cases when a population needs to be deleted/deactivated altogether, such as a population added in the past which has no specimen and the ID is obviously incorrect after a taxanomic revision or other advice . Also just in the case a population has been created in error. TPFL currently deactivates the population (inactive record) and sets all forms (occurrences) to a status of "rejected".