PDB clutter

Question - are there rules on adding entries to PDB? It seems to me that the person adding the entry should post a picture, fill out most if not all of the description fields, and enter comments. There seem to be a lot of "blank" entries in PDB with nothing more than a name. For instance, searching for "hibiscus" pulls up a list of dozens of cultivars of H. rosa-sinesis that have no picture, color, or comments attached. In the case of "hibiscus", having all these blank cultivar entries makes it harder to search for species within the genus.

I don't mean to imply that every single detail has to be filled out for every single plant. One of the nice things about PDB is that everyone can add their pictures and comments about the plant. I am just suggesting there should be guidelines on a minimum required level of detail before a new entry is created. Maybe I'm just in a grumpy mood today!

This message was edited Aug 21, 2004 6:51 PM

I've actually appreciated this feature of PDB :)

It's allowed me to match a photo of something I've taken and have an outline of information to begin using.

I like it :)

I know a lot of the really large genus have been mass uploaded to the PDB and there are several projects going on to fill in the blanks. I know that Terry is always looking for a few good men & women to assist with such work.

This message was edited Aug 21, 2004 8:27 PM

Yep, good points langr and Dea. It's helpful for me to see those also.

Tom, I think those entries you refer to were put there to help "jumpstart" folks, and the entries.

If I see something like that it is like a memory jog to me and I hear myself say, "Hey, I grow that!"...and then will (try) to add info. (Often-times I see entries with lots of info and pics....when I see those, even tho I grow the same, I figger enuff is posted.)

If you see a "blank entry", post what you know about it...that might help others to post a little bit also.

I understand your frustration though...looking things up only to find the name and no other info is sometimes disappointing. However, remember, the PDB is a work in progress and, hopefully, will always be. It will just keep growing', and growin', and growin'....

langbr, mass uploading of a genus is a good idea - no disagreement there. Details on species can be filled in by anyone who takes the time to do the research. However, hybrids and cultivars are subjective. Maybe we need a way to create "subcategories" for cultivars, so there would be just one entry for H. rosa-sinesis, and then another link you could go to for all the cultivars.

This message was edited Aug 21, 2004 6:57 PM

Very well made point 'Shoe, it's definitely a work in progress!

TomH

I'm not sure I've quite got the gist here, please let me know if I've gone off at a tangent!

You suggest subcatagories for cultivars, in what way would the subcatagory entries be different?Are you suggesting the main details are on the species page and just a list of cultivar names, a set of cultivar entries with some details to be filled in, a set of cultivar entries with the same checkboxes as the main species entry or something different?

Baa, I think it is I who has gone off on a tangent! What I was thinking of was adding another level to the hierarchy, e.g. family -> genus -> species -> cultivar. The cultivar links would appear on the entry for the species. So, for instance, if you just searched for genus "Hibiscus", you would get a page with entries for the various species, one of which would be H. rosa-sinesis. Then, if you clicked on that link, the details page for H. rosa-sinesis would have links for all the culivars and you could in turn click on those links to get more details. But there would be only one entry for H. rosa-sinesis on the main "hibiscus" page.

It would likelyrequire a lot of work by Dave to set this up - so it's probably not practical.

Hope my post was not considered rude TomH :)

I remember once, I asked if the Admins could somehow 'alert' every PDB post that did not have a photo so I could go photo hunting! ;)

Right thanks!