Sean A. Zera wrote:
> There is definitely some taxonomical confusion that makes the database
> harder to use. For example, pages for both Belamcanda chinensis and
> Iris domestica exist with different info in each, as well as seperate
> entries for Pardanthopsis dichotoma / Iris dichotoma and xPardancanda
> norrisii / Iris x norrisii. It might help to consolidate the info and
> automatically redirect the pages with older nomenclature to their
> corresponding entries. If older synonyms should be removed from the
> main page completely, it would possibly help to actually state that if
> you don't see the species you're looking for, type it into the search
> box to see if it's already in the database under a synonym. I know
> this is obvious to some people, but it might not be to others. As to
> how to decide what names to use for species entries when there's
> debate over the taxonomy, *clearly* a duel to the death is the only
> honorable resolution.
>
> It would be nice if any user could actually correct obvious errors
> (like typos) rather than just adding more info to refute them. For
> example, there are a few misplaced photos (i.e. Iris lutescens photo
> #9) where users would benefit from the photo actually being relocated
> rather than just having its identity corrected in the comments. I
> assume the database doesn't work this way because true wikis are
> higher maintenance and just beg for vandalism.
>
> On a somewhat related note, does anyone still grow the spectacular
> white Pardanthopsis pictured in the database (under Iris dichotoma, of
> course)?
>
No.... that was mine, that I raised from seed. I made sure to kill it
since it was so rare, and I had no idea it was special. LOL. I know, I
could kill myself for it too!
You bring up several good points, that have given me ideas for improving
the site. I'll work on those in the months ahead and maybe you'll like
what you see.
Dennis in Cincy
