Development of a common insect catalog website

Lavr, thank you for your feedback. It's nice to have a reaction. Questions like yours arise regularly. For example, in a couple of posts above, sdi expressed a similar sentiment.
The situation goes something like this:
I make a system on the site → The system is not perfect, because the volumes are not measured → We need curators who would follow their favorite groups, in which they (curators) are specialists → http://lurkmore.to/%D0%92%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%B...%85%D1%83%D0%B9 (with a few exceptions) → The system is not perfect.
Given such a vicious circle, as well as the fact that work on the site is not only work on the system itself, I think the result at the moment is very good. And it will only be much better if a significant number of groups have their own curators. If anyone wants to become one-let them know, I'm waiting with open arms (my moan #138). All that is required for convenient work with so-called editing systems on the site — always ready to blind (if something is not already blind)...
Actually, the topic is called " Creating a common site...", because from the very beginning it was clear that a great result would only be in the case of this very common participation — from whom photos, from whom work on group classification, from whom moderation, etc. One translation into English is just worth it;--)
ZY. I'll pay, perhaps, a little more for the general presentation. For example, now, after the last database update has passed, they are waiting for me:

~850 photos uploaded by users on the site that need to be processed/published.
~2400 photos that have not yet been uploaded to the site, but the permission to publish them was obtained from the authors.
— A database that has started to slow down somewhat due to so many taxa on the site, which is already slowly affecting the user experience. Accordingly, we need to speed up this database.
- Development of a system for maintaining butterfly collections and personal libraries on the site with the possibility of sharing between users, etc. (see acc. subject)
- Cataloging photos of butterflies from Molbiol (see acc. a mildewed theme).
- Redesign of the Community section.
- Several new updates on synonyms, geography, and forage plants that have already been prepared with raw information.
- System for setting up fishing/photographing points on the map.
— A system of individual email newsletters that affect the activities of each user on the site.
~50 planned minor improvements to the site.

So, while I'm still doing all this, without curators who improve the system, nowhere;--)

This post was edited by Asar-07.01.2013 14: 01

There was a major update of synonyms and generic combinations on the site. Now there are slightly fewer than 120,000 of them for slightly more than 60,000 taxa...

This post was edited by Asar - 11.01.2013 12: 58

What you're trying to do is an INCREDIBLY huge amount of work.
When the photos uploaded to illustrate the view will appear during the normal period of time (1-2 days), I will gradually fill the database with photos of views from my collection. In the meantime, when after uploading a photo, it is almost impossible to wait for it to appear on the site, it is not interesting to do this. The last time I uploaded it was a month ago, but the photos haven't appeared yet. This is not a criticism or a claim - it is a statement of fact. And problems with the untimely appearance of uploaded photos in the database are associated with an exorbitant amount of work for a very small number of" hands "

Sergey, you are right, there are delays in publishing photos. But the largest of them over the past six months was still not a month, but 2 weeks and was associated with the imposition of the latest database update on the New Year's coma. Currently, the oldest unpublished photos were uploaded by users yesterday, January 10. Your photos are also not listed in the unpublished ones, if something is wrong-write details to the mail, let's see what happened to them (although this is highly unlikely).
In the near future, there will be no two-week or even weekly flights with publication. Delays will be as usual-the same 1-2 days, rarely — 3 (usually for species that are simply not in the catalog, and which must first be entered in this catalog, and only then publish the corresponding images).
But all this is rather just a clarification on the numbers, and so yes, the number of hands leaves much to be desired:--)

ZY Clarified exactly according to your pictures: the last 2 uploaded photos were already on August 29, 2011. If it was actually loaded a month ago, then there are two possibilities:
1. A certain glitch (write more details, we will deal with it, or just try downloading at least one of them again).
2. Photos are left unpublished, because there are already many similar ones on the site (then they are not in your personal account on the site or they are in "deferred").

This post was edited by Asar - 11.01.2013 15: 42

 
When the photos uploaded to illustrate the view will appear during the normal period of time (1-2 days), I will gradually fill the database with photos of views from my collection.

Why are they even lingering?

Why are they even lingering?

First, there is pre-moderation — I cut off photos that will not be published (as a rule, these are pictures that repeat those already available on the site).
Then there is retouching (I additionally edit about 90% of uploaded photos, primarily crop, but sometimes color / tone).
Then I publish and, if necessary, update the illustrations on the view pages.
Not a single photo is published on the site "automatic".
Therefore, they are delayed.

This post was edited by Asar - 11.01.2013 18: 08

First, there is pre-moderation — I cut off photos that will not be published (as a rule, these are pictures that repeat those already available on the site).

Well, checking photos is also sdi, which keeps the whole topic by Definition butterflies funny... You can simply mark trusted people with a flag or get some kind of right, and skip photos from them automatically.

Then there is retouching (I additionally edit about 90% of uploaded photos, primarily crop, but sometimes color / tone).
Then I publish and, if necessary, update the illustrations on the view pages.
Not a single photo is published on the site "automatic".
Therefore, they are delayed.

New photos can be marked with the flag "Failed processing and control" or something similar. Show it immediately so that people can see what they uploaded. And then you dig into this processing and distribute it where necessary. Accordingly, after processing and verification, the photo is marked as valid. And then someone, say, uploaded a couple of dozen today, forgot what they finished tomorrow, and doesn't see anything for a week... month... who needs it. And if someone loads on a dozen or two sites, and each one will have similar problems... Why should people create problems, people come to your site, share their innermost thoughts... for free, and then there are also problems - but who needs it?

I also tried shipping at first, but then I gave up on this case... just because of these incomprehensible and unpredictable delays, and I think I'm not the only one.

Well, checking photos is also sdi, which keeps the whole topic by Definition butterflies funny...

I wrote it down. The test is not for the adequacy of the definition, but for duplicates and the need for new photos for a certain type in general. And, although different authors have a different percentage of duplicates (most do not even look at what is already on the site, although there are photographers who load photos for new types in most cases), everyone or almost everyone has some.
Therefore:

You can simply mark trusted people with a flag or get some kind of right, and skip photos from them automatically.

You can only check this box for people who:
1. guaranteed to ship photos that are exactly needed on the site (not duplicates)
2. guaranteed to ship photos that do not need additional retouching.

New photos can be marked with the flag "Failed processing and control" or something similar. Show it immediately so that people can see what they uploaded.

People can immediately see what they've uploaded. In the personal account on the site. And after each zagurzki, they are given a link to this section of the personal account with a reminder that they should edit the data for their photos there if necessary.

And then you dig into this processing and distribute it where necessary.

The fact is that according to the results of moderation, about a third of the photos will simply be deleted. And the remaining ones can be changed (retouched). And while all this is happening, people can already write comments to them, etc.

I also tried shipping at first, but then I gave up on this case... just because of these incomprehensible and unpredictable delays, and I think I'm not the only one.

With delays, you need to do something, but still there should be no misunderstandings, because all uploaded photos are always available to the photographer in the personal account, i.e. it is enough only for the photographer to know that, they say, they are. But when there is a mess in the gallery , then all users, including those who came for the first time, should understand that these photos may become completely different tomorrow, but this photo, the link to which the person has already memorized and/or sent to another, may not be there tomorrow at all.
So, look in the LC for how photos are displayed there (and by the way, you can't do without this section at all when uploading photos with archives, because before publishing, the photographer will edit the data for pictures there), maybe then everything will be clarified.
Well, as always ready for discussion, if anything. I don't have any ultimate truths...

P. S. There is also the fact that many photos on the site are not uploaded at all by photographers. There are people, especially foreign ones, who do not mind publishing their photos on the site, but they will not load them themselves. Because you'll have to edit it anyway. So, for speed, we rather need another person who can publish on a par with me, so he would really save the situation on the issue of delays (no volunteers by any chance?-- ), and misunderstandings, I repeat, should not be now, because unpublished photos are always available in the photographer's personal account...

I uploaded photos of katokal kochubey, musmi and maltrechti around December 15. Now I'll try downloading again, if they don't load, it means either I have a glitch on my computer, then I'll try it from others or some fatal error on your server.

People are loading everything, and I checked right now - everything is OK. Send the photo to my email, I'll try to download it specifically from your account, it will be clear what's going on. Email: main#lepidoptera. ru.

I tried on another computer - everything loads if you remove the auto-detection of the photo format, and manually select jpeg, on the first computer, when auto-detection is removed, everything also loads. Little by little I will post photos of catocals and bears. True, the classification of bears is "very lame", but by species names more or less.

This post was edited on sdi-12.01.2013 12: 51

I also thought about barry's suggestion, consulted with my friends (c). Still, yes, I will try to redo the photo upload for the Post-rather than Pre-Moderation option. Probably, it will be ready today (as it will be, I will additionally unsubscribe). Photos uploaded "in the old way" will not be lost anywhere and will be published in normal mode.

I also thought about barry's suggestion, consulted with my friends (c). Still, yes, I will try to redo the photo upload for the Post-rather than Pre-Moderation option. Probably, it will be ready today (as it will be, I will additionally unsubscribe). Photos uploaded "in the old way" will not be lost anywhere and will be published in normal mode.

The site should not depend on one person - this is a collective project and you probably have people there who can check for duplicates and select the main photo for the taxon and crop and process it (if you have such a technological process there). Give them the appropriate rights. They will also unload you at the same time, and there will be no such pauses if you go to America there for example for half a year or family circumstances have developed so that you are not up to the site... On the macroid, for example, there are dozens of such people.

So, it's done.
Now new photos are uploaded directly to the site's gallery, and only then I go through them, deleting unnecessary ones and editing those that need editing. And if they don't need it, then it's fine;--)
You can read more here: http://lepidoptera.ru/community/11842
Barry, thanks for the tip-off. People have already thrown up similar ideas to me, but I still thought more seriously about this only now. Previously, the volumes allowed you to sculpt a lot of images based on photos, but now they are clearly not...

Home page of the "Community"section http://lepidoptera.ru/community it has undergone another modification. So that you can take one look at all the latest comments, both common to everyone and related primarily to a specific registered user.
Including on small screens.
If anyone notices that it has become better (or worse) - write, do not hesitate.

This post was edited by Asar - 22.01.2013 00: 05

Who after moving the modeling does not load or gives God knows what-clear the browser cache or reload the page using Ctrl+F5.

The pink color of the page frame would be replaced with gray - less eye-straining and not competing with the bright colors of most butterflies.

So there seems to be no pink anywhere . Maybe another site? My eyes are the background color lepidoptera.ru they don't bother you at all.

Usually, this effect is observed if you strongly raise the brightness/contrast of the monitor. For example, for most newly purchased computers, it is raised by default so that it is really very stressful to watch for a long time. It is on such a screen that instead of calm beige salmon, there will be a vigorous almost pink one.
But in general, the design will need to be changed, yes. Only it is difficult to do this with portal sites, very few decent licenses are sold under them.

Well, not pink, but yellow-pink... as the letters of the name of this topic are almost (see above). For example, I like the background color and buttons of our forum. It doesn't bother you. And there... somehow the frame" hits " my eyes. The colors on my monitor are displayed normally.

Green also does not "push" much: http://www.ukbutterflies.co.uk/index.php. Blue is already annoying: http://www.lepidoptera.pl/start.php?lang=EN. But these are probably my individual characteristics. I love gray for texts!

Green also does not "push" much: http://www.ukbutterflies.co.uk/index.php. Blue is already annoying: http://www.lepidoptera.pl/start.php?lang=EN. But these are probably my individual characteristics. I love gray for texts!

What an aesthete you are! ))
You, it seems, did not work in DOS)))

Well, constantly using DOS without shells is absolutely hardcore, sitting in Norton Commander or Volkov Commander is for dummies, and in DOS Navigator there was a light gray option, even the default one;--)

And there... somehow the frame" hits " my eyes. The colors on my monitor are displayed normally.

I will change it along with the overall design change, and if this matter drags on, I will test it with different settings, ask more people for their opinions, and think about a slightly calmer shade within the current version.

Offline gathering of users Lepidoptera.ru as well as sympathizers. April 2013

Detailed description of the event: http://lepidoptera.ru/community/13089
If someone has something to discuss or ask, but for some reason they can't do it using the link above-write here, do not hesitate.

This post was edited by Asar - 03/22/2013 20: 46

do death's head caterpillars (acherontia atropos) feed on honey from hives?

do death's head caterpillars (Acherontia atropos) feed on honey from their hives?

And where is it written? Butterflies, yes, feed on honey from hives.

And where is it written? Butterflies, yes, feed on honey from hives.

http://lepidoptera.ru/taxonomy/2852

  http://lepidoptera.ru/taxonomy/2852

thank you, we will fix

This is me at one time stepped, in the book, where the information about the beehives was data in the feed section, so on the site in the feed it otrpavilas. Thanks for the tip, I fixed it.

This post was edited by Asar - 10/15/2013 20: 56

This is me at one time stepped, in the book, where the information about the beehives was data in the feed section, so on the site in the feed it otrpavilas. Thanks for the tip, I fixed it.

For some reason, there are two feed lists given there-two different lists
Beta vulgaris and Jasminum fruticans are not listed in any of the lists.
We don't have any potato fields. In the Crimea, I know of three natural food plants-dereza, beetroot and jasmine.

It flies to Crimea in October.

And I would also fix this:
- A very powerful butterfly for Europe.
- need constant replenishment
- the original home

...
- A very powerful butterfly for Europe.
- need constant replenishment
- the original homeland

At first, the site had descriptions similar to the book descriptions. Then the transition to a more strict system took place. In it, most of the attributes are formalized, and below them is detailed information indicating the sources. That is, first-the attributes in brief, and then-completely with the sources and information about who contributed what to the site.
The remnants of the first version are displayed under the Old Description heading, because not all the information from them has been transferred to the new ones. Therefore, it is necessary to treat the texts in this "old" section with leniency, in the future it will simply not be there.
The list of plants at the top is a transition from plants from the old description to the formalized one.

As for additions, in particular about plants — they can be made by any registered user through a special form, indicating the source. And even more so a user registered as early as 2007;--)

This post was edited by Asar - 16.10.2013 01: 04

I was browsing the site and came across this: Lycaena virgaurae (Linnaeus, 1758)
Is there really such a view, or is it still ochepyatka?

I was browsing the site and came across this: Lycaena virgaurae (Linnaeus, 1758)
Is there really such a view, or is it still ochepyatka?

There is no such view!
Typo it!!!

"Aricia agestis
Time of summer
May June July August"

Summer time where? In Cyprus or in the Central Ural region of Russia?
I think you should specify the region for which the time of summer and the number of generations are given.
In the Crimea, for example, in warm years, the species flies from April to December. In Cyprus, perhaps, the period of summer can be even wider.

Typo: "Sunbeam".

This post was edited by okoem - 21.10.2013 08: 26

I was browsing the site and came across this: Lycaena virgaurae (Linnaeus, 1758)
Is there really such a view, or is it still ochepyatka?

Synonyms should not be forgotten: Lycaena virgaureae (Linnaeus, 1758) = Heodes virgaureae = Papilio virgaureae Linnaeus, 1758 and according to fauna europaea (link below) only Lycaena virgaureae is valid

There is no such view!
Typo it!!!

Link. Or does it mean nothing anymore?
Something, gentlemen, you are not carried there in my opinion

This post was edited by vasiliy-feoktistov - 10/21/2013 10: 05

Synonyms should not be forgotten: Lycaena virgaureae (Linnaeus, 1758) = Heodes virgaureae = Papilio virgaureae Linnaeus, 1758 and according to fauna europaea (link below) only Lycaena virgaureae is valid

Here we are talking about a banal spelling error, and not about synonyms. Please note that in the subtitle of this page, the name Lycaena virgaurae is written in large letters, AND NOT Lycaena virgaurEae (the letter E is omitted in the word). Isn't that a typo?

This post was edited by TEMPUS - 10/21/2013 10: 27

Here we are talking about a banal spelling error, and not about synonyms. Please note that in the subtitle of this page, the name Lycaena virgaurae is written in large letters, AND NOT Lycaena virgaurEae (the letter E is omitted in the word). Isn't that a typo?

Well, this is a banal double and should be deleted
The current page is here: http://lepidoptera.ru/taxonomy/8424
Just not enough hands for everything at once.