I decided that a great compliment to this forum would be an online encyclopedia of Japanese maples. So, without anybody's permission or the requisite knowledge to do so, I went ahead and started one. It's a wiki, as in Wikipedia, which means that anyone who knows anything and can use a word processor can add or edit information. The encyclopedia, like this forum, will have to be a community effort if it's to succeed, because, as noted, I don't have enough knowledge, let along pictures. The backbone of the wiki is the cultivar list. I've added about 1200 cultivar names that I scrounged from my own inventory lists and public websites. I didn't have Mr. Gregory's World Checklist when I started, but I do now, so a bunch more may be added. In the wiki, I've linked each cultivar name to a detail page. The idea is that each detail page will have information about and photos of the cultivar. At present, hardly any do, but I"ve made a few pages just to show what they might look like. I've also added page templates for cultivars starting with 'A', am working on the rest of the alphabet, so all the user has to do is fill in the requested information, which includes the information asked for on the official cultivar registration form, plus one or two additions. From the wiki, you can also go to the official cultivar registration form (I thought it might as well be online) and to an experimental online form. The latter just demonstrates what could be done without cost if the registrar wanted to (I'm aware the graphic isn't a maple). I've also made a primitive cultivar finder that probably won't help experienced collectors much, but might help newbies locate desired cultivars for purchase. I encourage everybody to visit the site and have a look: http://bit.ly/maplewiki But don't just look, contribute your cultivar names, descriptions, photos, growing experiences, etc. If you have a suggestion, don't tell me, just go ahead and implement it. That's why it's a wiki. At the very least, I hope frequent contributors to this forum will allow their posts to be included on the wiki pages. Aside from help making the pages, I need help from some tech-savvy person who has experience with wikis (I just learned the very basics to make the site.) I need to include Google ads in order to help pay for the hosting, and so far haven't been able to make that work. Eventually, I'll also need help moving the wiki to its own site. As incentive, I'm offereing a qualified person their choice of invites to Google Wave or Google Voice. Please check it out and contribute: http://bit.ly/maplewiki
You do know Wiki already has Maples? I look forward to you adding images under the Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike licence. Nice idea. Of course its a never ending project. I contribute funding now to Wiki for my image needs. I only use the images if they are in the public domain of course.
A great idea, the more (good) information about Japanese maples available online the better. As good as any book or paper checklist of maples is, it becomes outdated the instant it is printed. The internet is the natural home most suited for such a database, I doubt any publisher would consider printing a full colour book of Japanese maples with a page for each of 1200 cultivars. I know the Maple Photo Gallery here performs a similar function, but having the information available in the form of a wiki, rather than a forum, is better suited for reference purposes. (I have already added some of my pictures for one cultivar, time permitting I will add some more)
Why? The Maple Photo Gallery in this forum is the result of years of effort by lots of contributors, it has a lot of added value, it works and the hosting is wholly satisfactory. I have yet to be convinced that there are good reasons to start all over again from scratch (it is really nothing in particular against Siwasher's initiative, which I evidently respect). Gomero
No criticism of the Maple Photo Gallery intended, I think it performs a wonderful service. The problem with the forum format is ironically also what I like so much about this forum. The discussion element to the posts is nearly always interesting, but not always relevant from a reference point of view. What if I click on a Cultivar and find there are three full pages of discussion? I either have to read the whole thing or potentially miss out on an important nugget of information at the bottom of page 2. The wiki format would strip out this type of discussion but hopefully retain the relevant information. Also there are some pictures posted in the gallery where it is questionable they are the cultivar the poster claims them to be. In a healthy wiki format the peer review process would quickly remove any bogus posts. There is no reason a MapleWiki and the current photo gallery could not coexist, the wiki as a more factual resource, and the gallery for those who want more meat on their bones.
One major improvement needed: make international metric measures the standard. Remember that imperial measures are despised in most of the world.
Take our recent discussion on 'Surprise' vs. 'Sunrise', how could a wiki format could give a different result?, who has the last word? Ascertaining the correctness of a cultivar name is an exceedingly delicate subject and even the 'Maple Society', arguably the organisation with the highest concentration of maple experts, is very reluctant to address the issue in any structured approach. Gomero
With recent introductions, hopefully the originator of a cultivar would get involved and have the last word. Of course there will always be differences of opinion over whether a particular tree is one cultivar or a closely related other, but in a wiki the more obvious mistakes could be quickly weeded out. I hope it does well, the more information out there the better.
Get issues out in the open for all to discuss. The single prevalent problem we all have had in Maples is the lack of correspondence and dialogue of these plants for many years. Some areas have gone on their own tangent with these plants with naming and I am not so certain they have had the plants best interest at heart. Some people have had their own agenda and have tried to ramrod their thinking through to the masses. I'd feel better about these people if they really knew what the Maple looks like and can Id it in the field or a garden rather than giving us the impression they are expert about a Maple they have never laid eyes on before. The person that knows the Maple and has grown it will in time be equipped to know who is full of it and who is telling the straight scoop from what and how they have learned of that Maple. We need to remember that we all have learned of and about these plants a little differently from each other. It does not matter to me that there already is a Wiki that exists. I think various people in this forum as well as a concerted effort by the Maple Society can come up with a whole lot more pertinent and informative Wiki for all to see than what we currently have at our disposal. We already have a treasure trove of photos in this forum to work with, why not get to work on them and expand our horizons with these plants rather than be lazy and complacent and wonder why some of those photos of the same named plant do not look the same to us from those photos. You will never truly garner a real understanding of these plants by not knowing why and how they are designed to look different, supposed to look different, depending on where they are grown. Years ago, it was impressed upon me that no two Crimson Queens look the same during the growing season. At first I thought this comment was said to me in jest. Later on I learned what that mentor of mine was trying to tell me. Jim
I prefer keeping the different systems ;-), I hate uniformity and... changing from one to the other exercises my mind..... Back to to wiki proposal, I would certainly support an initiative of this sort for maple species. With species we are in a safer ground than with cultivars (read again the last paragraph of Jim's post to understand what we mean), but even here there is controversy: are amoenum, tenuifolium,... separate species?, who will have the last word? As an example of what is needed, recently I wanted to know what was the native range of A. shirasawanum , well it took me a long time to find out since the information in the web was very fragmented, when it was not in Japanese. Some may say that there is already Flora of Japan, but I find the information there not complete and hard to use. Gomero
LOL, just very tired of the exercise, but generally try to post both measurements for courtesy on this forum, old age setting in I guess. When in Rome .......
Siwasher I like your wiki idea. I think this forum is amazing, but it's not exactly set up as a reference site, which would be really helpful. No harm in having information in different places.
hi Michael Daniel reply 4/5 week ago about this ; and resolve this problem in little time :-) with the rispect of Siwa ,for me UBC forums , the book Maples of the world,and The Maple Society news letter are again a valide struments for maples culture.i prefere this instruments for my informations ...
In a Wiki, it's very simple to make an internal link to another page. You can then copy the page for say "surprise", copy it and make a new one called "sunrise", specifying that the two names are used, and linking to the discussion on this forum. I do understand Jim's arguments about having "real-life" experience about maples to be able to give accurate information, but I also think that as a simple reference tools for non-specialists, such a wiki could be a great source of knowledge. This wouldn't prevent me from visiting the forum: I've spent hours watching the pictures and reading about discussions on species or cultivars I hadn't even heard of before, but also reading posts on the few I know quite well for having a speciment at home. The use one can make of the two is a bit different I think. I've always been a fan of maples, but I became even more interested in them when I started doing bonsaï. Now I have my reference links for trees (e.g this forum for maples, conifers.org for conifers, etc) that I check for general info on a particular species, but go to forums for specific information on techniques, pests and diseases and tjhe way to cure them, bonsai soil (see the thread on cat litter : I can tell you it has many references on bonsai forums!) and so on. People on bonsai forums also post pictures of their trees according to the season, a wiki page doesn't have to have two dozen photos of the same tree, but if ones wants to admire photos just for their beauty, they can search forums. Not to mention what will never be in a wiki: all the plants grown from seeds that can have interesting features or give interesting trees, but that can't be registered as true "cultivars". For instance, if some of the seeds an English-speaking gentleman living in the south of France germinate, they will likely be a bit different from the mother-plant, in which case I will happily post photos of them here, but not on a wiki. So as "maf" put it, I think both can be useful, the "wiki as a more factual resource, and the gallery for those who want more meat on their bones". My 2 € cents...
Hi again, There are two major inconvenients to your wiki though: - Anyone can edit the pages. If this totally in accordance with the idea of wikis, it is an open door to massive spamming: I've used wikis for collaborative work since the early 2000s, and I quickly switched to a more secured access, members only, and registration to be approved. I had whole pages that were replaced by links to porn sites, not exactly was I had intended. - I had a look at the source of the page on 'Sawa chidori' and saw that the images were hosted by "ImageShack": this is not reliable, the images might disappear without any notice. The images on such a site should be hosted on a dedicated server, in case of hacking, they can be retrieved and the site rebuilt from a previously saved database. It has a cost: you need space on the server, and bandwidth if it becomes the reference you would like it to be...
Hi Alain, I believe Imageshack will host those images indefinitely, and the only one who can remove them is the original uploader. In the case of 'Sawa chidori' I can tell you they are not going to disappear without any notice. I had my own concerns about the image hosting and corresponded privately with Siwasher on the subject, and while he can (and does) host images on the server, he prefers them to be hosted at a place such as Imageshack (other hosts are available) for the reasons you noted: "space on the server, and bandwidth". It seems to be working so far, hopefully there will not be any huge unforseen problems. This is a genuine concern. While previous edits of the pages are stored, and can I guess be restored easily, it would still be a PITA. I imagine it would only take one such attack to prompt a switch to a members only policy for editing. As far as I remember, the only extra benefits for registering so far are that it allows you to upload images directly to the Maplewiki server.
