Sialia currucoides x sialis

re: taxonomic sequence and the correctness of hybrid names, there's nothing in the ICZN Code mandating that the first species listed in a hybrid formula has to be the one that's listed first in any given linear sequence - that's just a convention of the eBird checklist (and probably some other resources that list hybrids, although of course if they're following different checklists they may list the parental species in a different order) to make things look neater and more organized. Other sometimes-used hybrid formula conventions include 1. listing either always the female parent first or always the male parent first (if known, which more often than not isn't the case with wild animal hybrids), or 2. listing the taxa in alphabetical order (which can make it easier to find a hybrid in a long list at a glance if you don't know the sequence off the top of your head, although that's probably not a big issue on iNat; the Handbook of Avian Hybrids lists hybrid combinations in alphabetical order within families, for example, which makes it much easier to find a given hybrid in the book). Given that taxa on iNat are listed in alphabetical order rather than e.g. the eBird/Clements linear sequence, it could be argued that hybrid names on iNat should maybe always list the parental taxa in alphabetical order (or perhaps reverse alphabetical order so they appear after the second of the two parental taxa when browsing the iNat taxonomy?). (Alphabetical order also provides the benefit of not having to switch the names of the parental species around in a hybrid name if the linear sequence of the relevant part of the eBird/Clements checklist is updated - although with the ability to simply edit hybrid names on iNat rather than requiring swaps each time, that's probably not much of an issue anymore.)

(I'm certainly not opposed to using eBird/Clements's linear sequence for bird hybrids on iNat, just clarifying that it's not inherently more "nomenclaturally correct" than other ways in which parental species could be listed. In any case, consistency is probably the most important thing, whether parental species in all bird hybrids on iNat are listed in eBird/Clements sequence order or alphabetical order.)

@birdwhisperer But that's the thing: switching the order in which species are listed to something other than the eBird/Clements sequence (or whichever other sequence is being followed by a given resource) isn't "just as bad" as misspelling a scientific name. A misspelled scientific name (which there are unfortunately a few of in the eBird/Clements checklist) is a wrong name, following the rules of the ICZN (or ICN or other relevant nomenclatural code); on the other hand, there just flat-out isn't anything inherently wrong, following the rules of scientific nomenclature, about writing a bird hybrid formula (not really a concrete, defined scientific name along the lines of a species's scientific name or something like that) and listing the scientific names of the parental species in IOC sequence order or H&M sequence order or HBW/BLI sequence order or alphabetical order or random order or any other non-eBird/Clements order.

I added the hybrid (here) and asked about activating it (and all the other hybrids I added at the same time, listed here) a couple weeks ago, but haven't gotten a response. (I would gladly do it myself but I no longer have that ability)