Heads up: Some or all of the identifications affected by
this split may have been replaced with identifications of Mustela. This
happens when we can't automatically assign an identification to one of the
output taxa.
Review identifications of Mustela nivalis 41815
well we don't want to 'revert' since thats an imperfect tool that leaves alot of loose ends (more so the more time that passes). But we can lump these now and ressurect the original range
Sorry about the dangling ssp tony - validations have since been added that prevent this
I apologize for my poor choice of words: I did not literally mean "revert" as if it were a tool, I meant figuratively. This way no one has to make any new atlases or ranges since they already exist for the currently inactive Mustela nivalis (lato).
Unintended disagreements occur when a parent (B) is
thinned by swapping a child (E) to another part of the
taxonomic tree, resulting in existing IDs of the parent being interpreted
as disagreements with existing IDs of the swapped child.
Identification
ID 2 of taxon E will be an unintended disagreement with ID 1 of taxon B after the taxon swap
If thinning a parent results in more than 10 unintended disagreements, you
should split the parent after swapping the child to replace existing IDs
of the parent (B) with IDs that don't disagree.
@loarie : the taxon split has left two sub-species dangling below an now inactive species https://inaturalist.nz/taxa/41815-Mustela-nivalis. Did we really need a new "Mustela nivalis" taxon entity after the split?