bulkloading identifications with new ranking system

[wellerjes]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
I just bulkloaded some identifications. I was able to set them to "1" so they would be the valid/accepted identification in the catalog record and I uploaded without any issue. However, upon review of the catalog record, both the new identification and the previous/unaccepted identification are set to "1".

Is there a way to unaccept the current identification when a new identification is uploaded? I remember being able to set accepted vs. unaccepted in the past; the column title was: "accepted_fg"

[dustymc]

This seems like a place where an ad hoc Committee would be valuable; there are several requests (some of which probably conflict with others) regarding the new identification model, The Community putting together a comprehensive picture of how things do and should work would be valuable to me, and I think everyone else.

unaccept the current identification

Some variant of this seems to show up fairly often. I think perhaps a fundamental aspect of the model isn't well understood: There is no the - well, anything. These states are all possible:

• one accepted identification
• no accepted identifications
• more than one accepted identifications

paired with

• zero unaccepted (defined as identification_order==0) identifications, or
• more than zero unaccepted identifications

In other words, it's possible to

• do what you did in the old model, limit yourself to one 'preferred' and any number of 'unaccepted', or
• say things like "we don't think any of these are correct", or
• say things like "we think all of these are correct, we like them all equally", or
• say things like "we think all of these are correct, but we like some of them more than we like others of them", or
• do lots of other things which nobody has yet thought of, probably.

#6552 set some defaults on one UI (essentially what's being requested here, and a 'change_all_existing_identification_order_to' addition to the loader does look plausible), and then I think that confused a bunch of people (in the linked issues). Can we meet and figure out what needs to happen in both documentation and the UI?

[Nicole-Ridgwell-NMMNHS]

I'm doing my first citation upload since the update and it looks like the new upload format is going to add a lot of work manually adjusting rank. I don't see rank in template? This form defaults to 1?

I need to fields for:
-Set rank of the new citation ID. We're uploading lots of old records, many of these ids are no longer the accepted ID.
-Set the rank of the existing IDs. This could be a simple, set all other ids to this rank, if blank do nothing with the existing IDs.

I'll go forward with my current load, but I can't do any other citation uploads until this is fixed.

[dustymc]

I think the actionable parts of this have been addressed elsewhere, a Committee does not seem to be appearing, closing.