Plant Files General Entries - just a humble idea

I know they are badly unscientific, and they are not cultivator sensitive, but the general listings in the plant files were a huge help when one needed just general plant growing information, or did not know the cultivator of plant and just needed basic info. I know from what I have read that Terry and the crew have worked hard on cleaning up the Plantfiles, but would it be possible for these entrys to placed back into plant files - or into something new that just gives general information about the plant in question without having to pick out a cultivator. In the spirit of the book for dummies, these very basic and boring entries gave a wealth of information about the plant without having to get in there and know what cultivator you are looking at. With this if the cultivator list could be there to click on easily to use these general purpose entries for a spring board into more information on the plant would be helpful and get people more involved with the plants themselves.

Just a humble idea.

Mitch

YES!!

This is what we need! The information is scattered throughout many different cultivars of the same plant it's like wading through soup to find what you're after. For example Tropical Hibiscus (rosa-sinensis), there are 377 pages of cultivars with relevant and important care information scattered amongst them...why cant rosa-sinensis have one page of general care info?

Agreed but maybe a separate DB with links to real Plant Files for more advancing "Dummies" ;-)

Is it general culture information, problem solutions etc., that you are looking to have all in one place for each specific type of plant? If so, it's already available. There is a sticky at the top of many of the forums with that type of information and links. Isn't that information easier to find there than searching out the generic PlantFile entry? To search out that PlantFile entry, you would have to know the genus and species (no PlantFile entries just have genus...they would also have species or be cultivar specific), and also wade through all of entries looking for the generic 'catch-all' one.

For example, here's some examples of plant forums that have the sticky's:

Tomatoes http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/579234/

Iris http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/590970/

Daylilies http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/623557/

There are many plant specific forums that have those sticky threads at the top of the discussion threads, and if you know of some informative links that should be added, I'm sure Terry or Melody would be happy to do so.

Edited to clarify that the examples were for forums with informational sticky's, NOT PlantFile examples. Sorry for the confusion.



This message was edited Mar 30, 2009 10:35 PM

What I'm envisioning is what we'd find in a book...if we looked up, say Episcia...we'd find a single page with light and water requirements, maybe some general soil and fertilizer stuff...members could add their tips...but it would be all on ONE page, not scattered all over a hundred cultivars like it is now. Know what I mean?

Yes, I do understand, and I love the idea of having cultural information all in one place.

But, how would we verify and separate all of that cultural information for every species within a genus to lump into one generic PlantFile entry per genus? Even within one genus, there may be hundreds of species that have slightly different cultural requirements. Or are you suggesting one generic entry for every species within every genus? If so, then we are talking about adding thousands of what we have dubbed 'catch-all entries' to PlantFiles just to contain the cultural information.

Can you see our reasoning for phasing out the generic entries now? There's too many variables involved, and they only serve to confuse and pass along incorrect information.

To me there is a lot of great information in the general entries - after all a bearded Iris will grow more less the same no matter what cultivator it is, a Siberian one will grow the same no matter the cultivator, a Louisiana one the same, etc... This is not a big genus for all the iris in the world but just general ones for each group - one step up from species.

Lack of such entries has pulled me back to books when looking for plants to suggest to be planted in garden beds other then my own - it would be a huge help to have just one step up from the species, not at the genus level, an general entry for the plant.

Take he genus 'Rosa'. There are a great number that Joan cannot grow that I can. There are even some that Mitch can grow that I can't. Some species need trees to scramble up and do better in partial shade, others require full sun. Then, there are the ones that get pruned back by 2/3 every year and others only require a shape up.

Clematis is another genus that a catch all entry will not work. The different pruning times need to be noted on each cultivar.

Even peppers have different requirements even though they are all Capsicums.

So you see the dilemma. There really is not a good place in PF to post a general entry. Arguably, we could gain benefit from some sort of primer, but a catch all PF entry probably is not the best solution.

I really dont see the dilemma personally, this is the way a lot of gardening books have listed plants for years but - like it reads in my top post this could be in the Plant Files or this could be a separate thing with links back into the plant files.

When people dont know the cultivator it becomes very hard to use PF and makes them try to pick one they think might be it or makes them look off Daves for more general information. We have everything else they need here so why not have somehow general information also. I know it is not very scientific but it would be used,

I've often wished the cultivars were sub-listings. I look elsewhere if I don't know the cultivar or it doesn't come up in a PF search. A lot of them are just colors, anyway, when what I want is basic plant info. JMO

Yes...the cultivars should be sub-listings. Have all of the pertinent growing info on the main page.

Yep - would be a lot more information then we have now.

I miss those "catch all" entries also!

I see the problem with trying to provide general info by Genus... Do the Genus species entries (not for a specific cultivar, just for that species) still exist? Some of them do, I know, because I've found them... but I didn't know if they were being phased out also for species that have specific cultivar entries. ?

Part of the problem is that a lot of hybrid varieties seem to be known only by Genus 'cultivar name' with no species specified (for some perhaps because they are interspecific hybrids?). So if you're looking for general cultural information on your Amaryllis plants, where do you go? The species-specific listings don't apply, and you have to sort through hundreds of different varieties to find culture tips. Yes, those subscribers who know there's an amaryllis forum could find more information there, if they think to look...

On the Clematis example... a general entry would be very helpful, I think. Yes, different types have different pruning requirements, but an single comment entered on a general page could list all 3 pruning types (easier to explain them all together)...

I see these "general" entries as having most of their useful information as user-contributed comments, although some general information on hardiness, sun and moisture requirements might still apply (for plants where these things varied between varieties, it seems possible to find a way to indicate that, if necessary by an additional check box item.. for example, "Mosture requirement" might list 3 things, "requires constant moisture," "suitable for xeriscaping," and "variable, check specific entry."

It would be ideal to have the cultivars as sub-listings, giving an obvious "main page" for each species where comments and general info could be posted... but I suspect that would require a significant reprogramming of the database.

Many wild and native plants only have genus and species.

The problem comes in with something like a general Cucurbita pepo entry. That covers some squash eaten at the immature stage (summer squash) and others allowed to ripen totally to the hard rind stage. (pumpkins)

We are listening though, and are not dismissing the idea.

I miss the catch all photos under the noncultivar plant names. I used to be able to go to one listing and look at lots of photos of different cultivars or species of a type of plant and get an idea of what was available out there in plant land instead of opening lots of separate entries trying to get an idea.

That's the crux of it for me, too, Kell... especially with a new-to-me plant, I end up clicking through a hundred different cultivars, trying to read enough "general" comments about the plant to get an sense of it.

A general entry also gives people a place to add useful information even if they do not know what specific cultivar they might have. There are a lot of really good gardeners who don't care if it's a 'Purple Passion' or a 'Lost at Midnight' African violet, and they may have great contributions to make to a general page... but they end up feeling like their input isn't important if they have "noid" (no official ID) plants.

Thanks for listening. I know removing the entries wasn't done lightly... but maybe we can come up with an even better replacement for them, like a separate database with entries that link to the subset of related PF pages.

Is there anyone who (and being a plant ignoramus I cannot suggest myself, here, sadly) could take on a general grouping of plant files in any particular group? Say someone volunteer for tomatoes, someone for iris, someone for daylillies, for cucurbits? If DGers familiar with these groupings were to organize bits of it, it might be fairly simple to implement something from there. If there are many non-conforming varieties, perhaps a note of that and a list of which specific cultivars are non-conforming so that anyone looking could then go to the specific file or hunt?

I think if the information were collated, then an adjustment to the database wouldn't be quite such a can o' worms....

From my perspective, If there were to be general cultural information on a group of plants, It should be somewhere other than plantfiles. Perhaps an expanded version of FAQ. or perhaps at the beginning of dedicated forums. It should also be edited . Some of the comments even under specific cultivars are "off the wall". Allowing all cultural comments could lead to chaos.

While I'm definitely not suggesting we need a zillion more forums, not every type of plant has (or needs!) a forum of its own... so maybe a separate database for introductory information? With links to PF and to appropriate forums?

I'm all for moderating additions if possible or editing out anything truly off the wall, but I think the best way to get a lot of great culture tips etc. in one place is to let general info entries be user-contributed, like PF entries.

I'm looking forward to seeing where this discussion goes...

:-)

We have some ideas we're tossing around that we think would meet the needs for general description and cultivation information. These descriptions would not be open to the general public to add to, but we would definitely look to those "in the know" to help us create/edit the information.

If this idea pans out, we would not allow unnamed photos to be added, although we would show representative photos from among the current listings. (Those photos in the general entries were a real mess to manage. Some people tossed their named plant photos in there, because they didn't know how to create or find the existing entry, and others took the existence of unnamed photos as a green light to try to create listings for unnamed/NOID plants they are growing.)

A separate database sounds like the most effective way to set out that kind of info. Or a separate, differently operated page. Scroll down to where you think your basic category is and then open that to read a list and perhaps access the plantfiles DB...hmmm comments by zone...hmmm....

Whoops ---cross-posted with one who knows MUCH better...if it can happen in conjunction with streamlining the system without Killing admin I would love to see something like that. Especially given that I don't feel knowledgeable enough to find my way around plant files in any meaningful way.

A separate place sounds perfect to me but not at the beginning of a forum cause we don't have separate forums for each. Maybe select a few volunteers to set the individual entries up! (volunteer tomatoes are usually the best tasting in the garden so maybe this will work with files? ;-) Appreciate you thinking this thru for us!

I'm excited to see that this is being looked into. Critter's idea of a separate database with entries that link to the subset of related PF pages sounds like a good one ... It will be interesting to see how this pans out.

I am very much FOR this idea. I eagerly await the decision.