PlantFiles Update and a Request for Everyone...

I received a couple dmails containing wonderful news from Terry today!

First of all, a few additional checkboxes we had requested have been added.

"Plain" is now an option under "Leaf Type"

"Light" "Medium" and "Dark" are now choices under Leaf Color.

You know what this means... We need to go back through all the entries and either add the additional information, or submit an error report requesting that it be added.

Please scroll to the bottom of the page and click "Switch to live view" before you click the red button to submit an error. This makes it so much easier for mystic and Joan to make those changes. It takes them as much time to fix our error reports as it does us to create them, so please help them out by remembering to click "Switch to live view". :o)

Second, the entry for Saintpaulia ionantha has been cleaned up! :o) There were so many pictures of plants that were not S. ionantha. They were beautiful, no doubt, but incorrect for that particular entry. Look how nice it is! http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/go/738/ We really need a picture of S. ionantha added to this entry! :o)

That leads me to:

My request for everyone

Please, please add your pictures to the PlantFiles. We post pictures here all day long, but very few of us (me, included) add them to the PlantFiles. It is really no different, and no more difficult to add pictures to the PlantFiles than it is to put them in a post. We need everyone's pictures to make the PlantFiles as complete and useful as they can be.

The big, important thing is make sure your picture is of the exact cultivar you're adding it to. You must be certain your plant is correctly identified. If it is, then please post pictures. Post more than one picture if you have it. A close-up shot of a bloom is wonderful, and a picture of the whole plant is very important. A picture is worth a thousand words, and if each entry has several good pictures we can get a really good well-rounded idea of how that plant should look.

Remember, the Gesneriad PlantFiles will only be as good as we make them! :o)

Well said, Amy!

Saintpaulia ionantha will be given to me next Monday night at my first AV society meeting...........we will each get one to grow just to see the difference in growing conditions by each person......................so will add when appropriate to this entry..........

Thanks, Lin!

Wonderful, Gail! I know you'll grow a beautiful one! :o)

Rain..........can you help us by telling us on the other gesneriads what to fill in when we add a plant...........or at least take us to the beginning of Streps, Kohlerias, Sinningias, Chiritas, etc................

This is a good job for me tonight as i am real "GRUMPY"...............THANKS

Sorry you're grumpy, Gail. :o(

Honestly, I don't know what information needs to be filled in. At this point, if there is an entry, just upload your pictures and don't worry about the details, comments, descriptions, or anything like that. I guess we'll need to have a discussion in the near future about what details need to be checked for those, and where we'll get the descriptions and such. But for now, just pictures are fine. :o)

Before we start going back through all the entries again...

I thought we also needed an additional leaf color checkbox for "variegation" (where variegation is unspecified as to color or type). ??

Let's address this now so we don't go back through a third time! :-)

Rain, i spent last night mostly going through all my picutures and tagging each one...........it appears my memory is not as good as I thought it was..............this will take quite a while, but once it is done, I can upload in a short amount of time...................

critter, I requested a box for "Variegated". I emailed Joe Bruns (I think I got his name right), the fellow in charge of new registrations with the AVSA, explained what we are doing, and requested that a copy of the AVSA registration form be emailed to me. He gladly obliged, and I forwarded that form to Terry for use as a guideline in considering the changes I'd requested. On that form, if one marks that a plant is variegated, one must also include the color of the variegation. Terry said that since just selecting "Variegated" and not providing any additional color information seems to violate the rules of the form, she didn't feel comfortable offering that as a checkbox.

I am not very well-educated in the history of the AV, but I told her that perhaps at one time just selecting "Variegated" may have been an option and that the form was updated at some point when the other colors of leaf variegation came into existence.

I'm actually very glad you brought that up, because I had intended to mention that to see if anyone knows whether there was a time that selecting only "Variegated" was an option on the AVSA registration form, so that, for some plants, simply "Variegated" would be a so-called legal and correct description. Anyone have any input on that?

There are certainly plenty of registered descriptions that say "variegated" without offering any additional information. I would think if it's in the AVSA database, it would be a "legal & correct" description. You may be right... without checking, it seems to me that a lot of the plants that just said "variegated" were older varieties.

When I was going through the "C" names, I did do a quick search for additional info and checked for photos in the FC database... If I could tell that the variegation was just around the edge of the leaves, or clearly white/cream in color, I added that info even though it wasn't in the registered description.

I figure part of our purpose is to make it possible to search for AV's with variegated leaves, and it seems silly to me to leave some of those search results out because we don't know what kind of variegation the plant has.

I agree about needing a way to designate variegation without color designation for search purposes. Of course, the main point of the PF is to have accurate information available, so I can see it from that side, too. I think I'll email that fellow back and ask if there was a time when "Variegated" alone was an option on the registration form. Perhaps if he confirms that there was we might still be able to get that checkbox.

I've tried to look at it from the point of view of the PF admin and see that just because we want a particular checkbox doesn't necessarily mean it's warranted, so when I requested something, I tried to back up that request with information that would support our desire and need for it. Maybe I can get some information that will provide a legitimate need for the "Variegated" option. :o)

I just wanted to pop in and say THANK YOU!!! to everyone who has worked so hard on the PlantFiles cleanup. It means a lot to us to have your input and know the entries are as correct as you can possibly make them.

Hopefully your efforts will have longlasting consequences, too. You've established a "standard" for how entries should look, and as new members join and add varieties, they will follow your lead with filling in the details correctly.

I did have one question about height vs. growth habit.

When I reviewed the AVSA form, it included height as part of the growth habit (miniature = up to 6", semiminiature = up to 8", standard is 8-16", large is 16" and over.)

Would it be preferable for me to add that information to our checkboxes for miniature, semiminature, etc., and then remove the separate height checkboxes altogether?

YES!

We got rid of plant spacing (eg, diameter) for much the same reason, I think.

:-)

Adding the size info to the growth habit would be great, Terry! It's a wonderful idea! :o) One checkbox instead of two, and no room for error on the size.

In reading the last couple comments about variegation, do you understand why we're asking for the simple "Variegated" checkbox? If you look through the AV entries in the PF, you'll see that a LOT of them only say "Variegated" with no color designation, and those descriptions are coming straight from the AVSA's First Class CDs. I've not had a chance to email Joe Bruns yet, but since you're the one to ask...Is there any chance of us getting that "Variegated" checkbox?

Thanks, Terry!

I am sooo glad that all of you smart people are here to take care of this for all of us! I have to confess .... Yesterday I went and entered Episcia fimbriata 'Blue Heaven' to the data base so that I could upload my photo's and screwed up and entered something where it shouldn't have been, and had to get Admin. to correct it for me! Thank You Mystic! She was so gracious in fixing it for me! I have promised myself if I ever have another plant that is not already in there, I will call on one of you to enter it for me and then I will upload photo's! It might be much better if there were only certain people who were authorized to do entries .... that way people like me wouldn't be able to screw things up and make more work for the rest of you. I have learned my lesson! Promise! I will ask for help next time!

Thanks for the great job you have all done!

Lin

I do understand the variegated issue. But my concern is that we need to follow the AVSA form as closely as possible. And since they don't allow for non-specified variegation, I don't think we should, either.

I understand your point of view, Terry. I really do. However, unless we use our best guessing skills looking at pictures (which we all know is iffy at best - ie, is that variegation really white, or is it cream or tan or just really light pink), how should we designate those that only have "Variegated" in their descriptions? At this point, there are so many variegated AVs that will never be found in a search because there's no checkbox that indicates they are variegated.

I still think the form has evolved right along with the changes in AVs and that most likely the form used to not require color-designation. :o)

What about following previous AVSA guidelines also? I agree that the form must have changed over the years, or there would not be so many older entries with just the "variegated" designation.

I thought we ended up including some other descriptive terms that were in use but might not have been on the official form... For example, I don't think there's an official AVSA designation for "micro-miniature," but it's a useful and widely used term.

I'm not trying to make waves, just trying to provide some more input... :-)

I didn't have the luxury of the AVSA form when we made the changes a few months ago, so I relied on input from the forum members. Now that we have the form, we really should follow it, because that's where the registered descriptions come from, and it will avoid confusion later on.

If a plant's coloration can't be personally observed and described with certainty, and the hybridizer (or a reputable grower) can't be contacted for input, then the best thing to do is to note the variegation in a comment.

If the term "variegated" is used by the hybridizer in the registered description, how does that not count as "certainty?"

If we can verify that non-specific variegation used to be on the registration form, then can plain "variegated" be used as a checkbox item?

And I think we did have the official list of AVSA characteristics but still added other details according to input from forum members... I understand if the stand on that has changed, but I still think that details that come from registered descriptions should be OK to include.

There are so many new avs, especially by Rob, that have a lot of yellow in the variegation...........so I just put that in the comment area.........not a problem.........now that i understand I can do that.....................

Rain, leave me a certain number of letters to go back through.............can't do it today or towmorrow but promise I will...................just tell me which letters and divide evenly what we did.................

Gail, I think "yellow" variegation in the description could be entered in the details as "tan/gold," couldn't it? That's no different than finding the appropriate checkbox for a bloom color that's not on the list, such as "wine" or "lilac."

I said I would put it in the comment section because there is a giant difference between tan and yellow..........some of the yellows are quite bright................but i don't see it as a problem..........people can see in the picture..........no way to hide yellow..............

Yes, but the description says "tan/GOLD," as opposed to white/cream or pink. If it were a choice between not noting the variegation at all in the details and entering "yellow" as "gold" I guess it's clear what I'd have done.... but we're never going to have every entry in PF in complete agreement in terms of these descriptions, so no matter. :-)

critter, critter,..............................i don't disagree with you................I would mark it just like you said and then............in the comment section, I would add how yellow the foliage is........that is all......................

Oh, OK! That makes sense. I'm sorry, I misunderstood and thought you were only putting a comment and not adding it to the details. :-)

Terry, are you sure the form was for "height" and not diameter? I have never heard of violets referred to or described by height only diameter.

The American Violet Society has 4 classes of African violets based on plant size: miniature (less than 6 inches in diameter), semi-miniature (6 to 8 inches), standard (8 to 16 inches), and large (over 16 inches).

The AVSA Judges Handbook defines a mini as having a single crown of 6 inches or less in diameter. A Semi-Mini is defined as having a crown of less than 8 inches in diameter and so on....

Good catch, Snow! I'm not sure how I missed that... I'll bet it was diameter and not height on the AVSA form.

I'm not sure I really see the point of having height information since we have the size classes... and although I know we're entering standards as "6 to 12 inches" tall, I'm not sure any of mine get above 6 inches high even when they're in bloom... Then again, keeping the "height" category does no harm. :-)

Violets are never described by height only diameter. There are specific rules as to diameter for the various size types of saintpaulia.

Thanks, Snow..................being a novice, I have wanted to say that for a long time.............the only reason I knew if because of the 3x rule of when to change the pot size...............(not on minis)

edited to say.............when the diameter of the foliage is three times bigger than the pot, change the size of the pot.............you are right............height isn't even a factor with avs...........

This message was edited Sep 6, 2007 9:08 PM

The height thing is so irrelevent, I have to admit it bugs me. No harm I guess but I sure saw some odd entries like semiminis 12" tall. Very silly. No one serious in violets refers to height ever.

That makes sense - it didn't state height or diameter, and I guessed wrong ;o)