Notes From Nature Talk

Macrofungi Total Count

  • reddder by reddder

    Sorry, if I missed a previous discussion of this problem, but I'm finding it hard to believe that while I, alone, have transcribed well over 2,000 items in the Macrofungi project, to say nothing of the many, many other volunteers involved, that the completion total is reflected as 62. Hopefully, the work on this project is going somewhere other than the byte bucket.


  • simonedi by simonedi

    there is another post i think but the counts seem messed up for all 3 projects that are active actually, so its most likely a bug but hope they fix it soon!


  • jamac41 by jamac41

    It will be dependent on how thorough they're being and how many samples are in the project. Since each picture requires multiple people to transcribe it before it's declared as done, things will go slower, especially towards the start. This is exacerbated by the pictures to be transcribed being chosen randomly. I can't remember enough stats to work out the exact rates, but things start off very slowly, and the rate at which records are done will be roughly inversely correlated to the number still to be done. It's still quite possibly a bug, as 62 out of 40000 is still really low, but there will be a snowballing effect in evidence as well.

    Edit: fixed an error I wrote with the correlation bit.


  • Mr._Kevvy by Mr._Kevvy

    Here's the previous discussion:


  • El_Lion by El_Lion

    Is there any way the totals of the projects could get updated? I don't think it's very helpful to have them sitting at the exact same numbers since quite a long time now. To us, it looks like we're not making any progress at all. 😦 If the tool doesn't work, why show it?


  • micmac274 by micmac274

    Macrofungi goes up slowly. Sometimes you have to refresh the collection page to see it. Ornithology, with its low numbers (but that is for entire pages of data.) is the fastest, followed by calbug. Herbarium may have a bug to do with the total count.