After an identification...

I've been considering changing thread titles once a plant has been positively identified to the plant name.

So, when looking at the Plant Identification forum, instead of seeing a list of thread titles such as "mystery plant", "unknown plant", "please help ID", one would see (for identified plants) "Quercus alba", "Catalpa bignonioides", "Potentilla chiloensis", etc.

What do you think?

 

sounds like a good idea to me Daniel.

 

You've got my vote as well.

 

Seems like everyone is in agreement, so I'll start doing this.

 

Very good idea.

John

 

Daniel: May not be a bad thing, but golly, I sure get tired of the research I have to do to try to find the common name for all these latin guys. For example, I know(recognize) Quercus alba, (white oak), but might be lost on thousands of other names. Could the most common name be stuck adjacent to the Latin ,in parens, in order to simplify life for we botanically impaired folks?

 

Then it becomes a matter of most common name where. Most common name in SW BC? Canada? US? UK? Takes us back to the reason for botanical names in the first place.

The only reservation I have is that not all plants asked about are positively identified. However, if there is some question I guess those can just be left with the original frequently highly non-specific 'What is it?' or 'Name of weird plant?'.

 

RonB: Good point.

 

Yes, it's a good idea. The main problem I can see, though, is that so many of these queries contain a list of various plants. It might be possible to list two in the thread title, but six..?

Just to support Ron's comment on Latin names, I'll stick to them from now on; if I add a common name I'll have to emphasise that it's a possible common name.

The last time I tried to be helpful by using a common name, I ended up in trouble. Elephant's Ears will haunt me as long as I draw breath!

 

Ellsee: I never thought about something as dumb or as common as Elephant Ears. But I do have four varieties in my yard. No one ever asked and I never wondered , so now I'll have to dig out my Tropica and determine the specifics. Shucks! I didn't need the interruption. Good post. Thanks.

 

Note that the poll was way back in November 2003 . . . that nothing was done despite the 7-0 vote suggests there were technical problems which made implementation impossible. If nothing else, there must now be a backlog of several hundred threads for action, so I can't really see it happening. I'd think Daniel can't possibly have the time to do it all.

As an academic exercise, selecting English names should best be done on an educational basis, using names which promote botanical understanding and minimise potential confusion, e.g. using 'elder' only for Sambucus species (and not for Acer negundo), 'ash' only for Fraxinus species (not for Sorbus), 'cedar' only for Cedrus, etc. Then where there are regional variations, the name used should be the one used where the plant is native, to avoid cultural imperialism.

 

My vote would be to stick with the bonafide scientific name. Common names only serve to sonfuse the issue as to what is anyone really talking about!

Once a scientific name is verified, and Daniel is certainly capable of doing that, the issue of "what is it" is over! Scientific names are no harder to memoriize than commone names. People just don't like to do it! Alocasias (elephant ears) are a great point! There are thousands of them! So when someone asks about an "elephant ear" are we talking about the ones from South America? Central America? Polynesia? or SE Asia? And once we've settled on the location where it originated, which species? The world is filled with "elephant ear" type plants! And then is it an alocasia or a philodendron? Scientific names settle the discussion and you can get down to how should it be grown!

 

Yes, the backlog is in the thousands. It wouldn't be sustainable, and as rightly pointed out, people do ask about multiple plants in one thread. Also, there are a few instances where something seems to be settled upon, and then someone comes out with the right answer.

So, even though I'd like to do it, it's a non-starter at the moment.

 

I didn't notice this wasn't a new thread, wouldn't have posted if I had noticed it was apparently a dead issue. Maybe it should be closed (or whatever) so others don't get sucked in, so to speak.

 

Good idea. Thread closed.