Yes. The reason the New York Times said that it was one of the nicest on-line platforms was the way that people support each other and help out with that. We've all experienced all kinds of examples of things that we have misidentified, put it up as something else, and then it gets corrected quite quickly in a very supportive way.
I once found a small orchid in Yukon that I called a common species, and a high school student in the eastern U.S. said that it was such and such. It turned out that it was a new record of that orchid for Yukon. To be corrected by a kid in high school is a pretty neat experience, because it shows you the level of quality control that goes on.
Studies have shown that eventually most errors do get corrected. Because there's a photo or an audio, anybody can evaluate the evidence and straighten it out. Again, it's great for discovering species that aren't where we thought they were, but, again, you can look at widespread distributions increasingly well now. It doesn't matter if there's the odd error there; it's still gives you the range map.