Two possible Gesneriad errors

Well, I tried reporting these errors from the "Report an error" link a while ago but never received a response.

The entry for species Sinningia nematanthodes does not appear to be valid: http://davesgarden.com/pf/go/135641/index.html
To me it looks like Gloxinia nematanthodes (new name Seemannia nematanthodes).

The entry for Sinningia 'Bolivian Sunset' http://davesgarden.com/pf/go/136213/index.html may also be wrong.
It's generally considered to be a cultivar of Gloxinia sylvatica (new name Seemannia sylvatica).

Tom, did you include references to why you thought you were correct when you reported the error? I'm not trying to argue with you because I don't know gesneriads, but I don't think the admins have a ton of time to research things if people don't provide references for why they think they're correct so maybe that's why you didn't get a response. Either that or this is one of those nomenclature changes that's accepted by some and not by others and it's not clear which one's really right so it's taking some time to figure it out?

The other thing you can do if a lot of Gloxinias have changed to Seemannia's, you can go into the PF entry and add a new synonym--if the admins changed these entries to the new name they'd still leave the other name in as a synonym anyway because people are going to be calling it Gloxinia for many years regardless of what the correct name is!

ecrane3: My comment for the "Sinningia nematanthodes" picture does provide a reference to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloxinia_(genus) . I'm not a botanical expert so I won't advocate for the Seemannia vs. Gloxinia classification one way or the other. My point is that "Sinningia nematanthodes" is not a generally recognized species, and the picture looks just like the plant commonly known as Gloxixina nematanthodes. Similarly, Sinningia 'Bolivian Sunset' should be Gloxinia sylvatica 'Bolivian Sunset' following previous naming standards.

Like I said before I know nothing at all about these plants, I was just trying to help you figure out why you didn't get a response from the admins. Now I'm getting the impression that you put your comment on the picture--did you also do report an error like you said in your first message, or did you just put the comment on the picture? If you reported the error and the admins thought you were just talking about a misidentified picture then that's probably why you didn't get a response, pictures are supposed to be resolved by posting a comment on the picture, then hopefully the person who took it will agree with you that it's wrong, and then it can be moved to the correct plant. But admins won't do anything on pictures unless the person who took it agrees it's wrong (at least that's my understanding). If the entire plant is wrong, if there is no such thing as Sinningia whatever and it's really Gloxinia and/or Seemania, I would re-submit that error through report an error, including your reference, and don't talk about the picture being wrong, that way it'll be clear to whoever reads it that you think the actual entry is wrong, not just a mis-ID'd picture and you should get a response. Or it could be that they get tons of error reports and yours slipped through the cracks somehow, then maybe re-reporting it is still the right way to go.

Tom

I apologise for the delay, we did receive your report and we have been looking into it, sometimes name changes are very difficult to verify. I will be answering your report this morning.

Thanks, Baa! I see both entries have now been changed.