Issue 14609
Problems with interpreted occurrence dates in Dutch Vegetation Database
14609
Reporter: kbraak
Assignee: jlegind
Type: Task
Summary: Problems with interpreted occurrence dates in Dutch Vegetation Database
Priority: Major
Resolution: Fixed
Status: Closed
Created: 2014-01-10 11:55:49.705
Updated: 2014-09-10 10:31:17.932
Resolved: 2014-09-10 10:31:17.896
Description: Reported by Xander on Jan 6, 2014 via email:
There are gathering date problems in the dataset of the dutch vegetation database (http://www.gbif.org/dataset/740df67d-5663-41a2-9d12-33ec33876c47). This datasets was submitted in 2011. Some of the occurrences in de data portal are „gathered” in 2013.
Below are three records with a different date in the source file and the GBIF data portal and three records with similar dates.
Can you have a look what is going wrong here? Are some gathering dates misinterpreted?
SAMPLES:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.gbif.org/occurrence/336621429
GBIF: 19-jan-2013 <————————wrong
source file: 1978-07-13
http://www.gbif.org/occurrence/338094797
GBIF: 1-sep-2013 <————————————— wrong
source file: 1991-08-13
http://www.gbif.org/occurrence/336800697
GBIF: 11-jul-2012 <——————————— wrong
source file: 1993-08-11
http://www.gbif.org/occurrence/344376663
GBIF: 24-jun-2010
source file: 2010-06-24
http://www.gbif.org/occurrence/344376267
GBIF: 24-jun-2010
source file: 2010-06-24
http://www.gbif.org/occurrence/339507244
GBIF: 11-mrt-2010
source file: 2010-03-11]]>
Author: ahahn@gbif.org
Comment: Checked the values at source, and they indeed look correct (the value in the verbatim record is not identical to the one in the downloaded archive). @jlegind: need to check where the mismatch creeps in. Probably a full re-indexing should be the first step.
Created: 2014-01-22 10:54:55.849
Updated: 2014-01-22 10:56:22.565
Author: jlegind@gbif.org
Comment: The dates seem to be aligned with the verbatim values
Created: 2014-09-10 10:31:17.928
Updated: 2014-09-10 10:31:17.928