Hi

In the R6 model this situation should result in two records. One for the original determiner (non preferred) and one for the validator preferred. This could possibly be implemented in the import Wizard - is this what you were thinking ? .

Not everyone agrees that the validator is the determiner, so  I have tried in the past to get validator accepted as an additional field, but there is some disagreement on this, because the Recorder 6 model  is theoretically  better   than some being used elsewhere as it tracks the determination through any number of stages. For this reason, when this was last consideredast, JNCC's approval was not forthcoming.

I can progress this, but the role of the validator needs clarification. If they are actually able to change a determination, then they are a determiner and the R6 model is correct. However, one idea is that their role is that of a 'Reviewer',  giving an opinion on the overall correctness of the record, based on the infomation available, includng not just the taxa, but the location etc.  In this case they would not be the determiner, and any change in determination or other information would need to be made someone else based on futher investigation. In this situation it would seem reasonable to be able to record a validator as well as a determiner. Just how this could be fitted into the R6 would need some thought.