Swap set up to reflect the POWO concepts. Please do not commit without further discussion.
I'm aware of the ongoing discussion but it seems to be no closer resolution. I'm hoping this may spur some enlightened decision making
https://www.inaturalist.org/flags/521446

This just made things worse since it doesn't address Hydrocotyle prolifera....

Users in the past who legitimately entered H. prolifera as a valid species were made to change their observations to H. tribotrys through a previous taxon swap (all records of H. prolifera automatically became updated to H. tribotrys). Now H. tribotrys is being swapped again this time to H. bonariensis. This means that records originally entered as H. prolifera have changed multiple times, first to H. tribotrys to now H. bonariensis. H. bonariensis is a completely different species from H. prolifera which is now available again as an option. The broad approach to simply swapping H. tribotrys to H. bonariensis doesn't work since the name has been applied to both H. prolifera and H. bonariensis in past taxon swaps.

This will require someone to go through every single record of H. bonariensis to pull out H. prolifera observations that were originally entered as such.

Since the original taxon switch replaced H. prolifera with H. tribotrys shouldn’t the new switch be from H. tribotrys back to H. prolifera? Aren’t there a lot more observations of “H tribotrys” that apply to H prolifera than to H. bonarinensis?

@loarie @whiteoak @rfoster @jim_keesling