An independent project can be available on the web for months without being particularly discoverable. One useful indication of progress is when someone else’s resource index provides a way to find it. That has happened for KoreAves, the bird evidence atlas I have been developing for South Korea.
This is a record of what I can actually verify—not a claim of institutional partnership, scientific approval or measurable traffic growth.
The project behind the links
KoreAves connects species and subspecies identities, regional occurrence evidence, source provenance, and images that can be reused responsibly. The aim is to help readers understand where bird records come from and what they do not prove. A recorded occurrence is not a population estimate; an administrative region with qualifying evidence is not a biological range polygon.
The atlas covers a reference of 597 species and 20 subspecies, 617 taxa in total. The underlying documentation is public through the dataset notes and methodology.
Where the project appears
Three examples are directly visible in external resource lists:
- Beary Birding includes KoreAves under Online Field Guides, alongside other bird-reference tools. This is an external resource listing, not a review or formal endorsement.
- New Zealand Birds links to the project on its birding links page and labels it a Korean bird evidence atlas.
- FMHY Educational Wiki includes KoreAves in its biology learning resources. This is a community-maintained directory entry.
These are different editorial environments with different purposes. What they have in common is that a reader looking for bird information can now encounter KoreAves through a source other than the project itself.
A separate kind of record: GBIF Literature
The GBIF Literature API record identifies KoreAves as a WEB_PAGE, with the project website as the linked resource. This is a catalogue/data-use record. It should not be read as a peer-reviewed publication, a quality certification, or an institutional endorsement by GBIF.
That distinction matters because the words indexed, listed, published and partnered are not interchangeable.
What this changes—and what it does not
These public listings give the project additional discovery paths. They also reinforce a practical design choice: source attribution and limitations are part of the product, not merely footnotes.
What I cannot infer from the listings alone is audience size, adoption, institutional approval or scientific validation. Those would require other evidence. I will keep recording external references with a link to the original page and an exact description of the relationship.
Next steps
The most valuable work is still the difficult work: better source coverage, taxon alignment, more rights-cleared imagery and clearer explanations of the atlas’s limits. External links are encouraging because they connect those efforts to actual discovery—not because they finish the work.
For the full engineering context, see the KoreAves case study and the original technical introduction.