DogsNDaylilies said:

True, but I think stars were previously only available for articles, if I recall correctly. I think they are a relatively new thing to individual posts.

It has been available in the threads for a loooooong time.

Really? Man do I feel ignorant. Hm.

Stars have been available for individual posts for a long time ... unless I'm just imagining that I've seen them for a long while.

I have a star on a post that was dated 2010.

But maybe I went back and starred an OLD post after the "star" feature became available. My vague memory says that Dave added the stars within a year or two of the site starting up.

But my memory is leakier than window screening.

I just spotted them when DnD mentioned it! Usually I take screen shots and file them away with photos of the plant/tree/shrub.

Thanks, Arlene. That makes me feel better.

pirl said:I just spotted them when DnD mentioned it! Usually I take screen shots and file them away with photos of the plant/tree/shrub.

That's actually a great idea (and one that has never occurred to me) !

The same procedure can be used to file a photo so it reminds me of how/where I want to use a plant.

The star feature has been there for quite some time, I have one dated 2011.

Okay, okay, I hang my head in ignorant shame. I don't know how I didn't notice them before. Being on ATP sometimes makes me think I'm losing my mind because I keep discovering things that I didn't know were there...and that's not like me at all. I'm usually the observant, notices-the-craziest-details sort of person. I'm losing my edge...

( )

i think THE most common answer to new features that people request is: "Well, we already HAVE that feature ... go here and look for that, click on this ... "

My theory is that anything we have seen more than 4-5 times tends to become invisible.

You are not alone, I too have requested something only to find out it's been there all along!

Here are a couple of other common errors we often have to correct in plant data proposals:

Unless the plant is a small tree, please do not check the "Patio/Ornamental/Small Tree" box. Yes, a shrub can be a perfect ornamental patio plant, but that's true of almost every shrub in the database, so it's nothing special. This checkbox is reserved for small ornamental trees.

Many gardening sites do not draw a distinction between alpine plants and rock garden plants. Our database does draw a distinction. Hovering over the "Alpine Gardening" checkbox will provide a description: "Small and hardy mat-forming plants with a deep taproot that can only survive in a harsh environment." Please do not check the Alpine Gardening box unless the plant meets that description.

And one reminder: Unless a plant will never grow too large for a 1-gallon container, please do not check the "Suitable in 1 gallon" box in the Containers field.

I find a lot of ambiguity in the choices. For example, the difference between a shrub and small tree is debatable, and either would seem suitable for a patio, so I'm unclear why that is even a choice. All plants provide erosion control - I rarely check that box, seems redundant to me.

I am trying to teach my old brain to think in metric, so I have been entering height and width in the requested spelled-out inches or feet but then adding the metric equivalent in parentheses. Hope that is OK. It also seems more inclusive to those members outside the U.S.

I would sure like to see more choices re leaves - that is often an IDing factor - alternate or opposite, general shape, edges. These could all be drop-down choices with nice little line drawings illustrating the differences. I am totally unclear what 'unusual leaf color' might mean, and again some basic choices would be helpful: green, blue, gray, yellow, variegated.

Just some random thoughts, none meant as criticism, likely would be a winter project for whomever works on the database.

zuzu said:Many gardening sites do not draw a distinction between alpine plants and rock garden plants. Our database does draw a distinction. Hovering over the "Alpine Gardening" checkbox will provide a description: "Small and hardy mat-forming plants with a deep taproot that can only survive in a harsh environment." Please do not check the Alpine Gardening box unless the plant meets that description.

There are thousands of Sempervivums tagged "Alpine gardening" in the database

https://garden.org/plants/grou...

but zero with a taproot.

https://garden.org/plants/grou...

Is there any way to make a mass databox update to Semps and remove "Alpine gardening" from the genus?

Yes, I can remove it.

It's gone.

It would be most helpful if people could avoid specifying a maximum zone for most plants unless those plants actually require winter cold to survive (or fruit or whatever). In my zone 11 experience these maximum zone recommendations are proved wrong a lot of the time and simply represent errors propagated in the echo chamber of the internet.

To be perfectly clear with an actual example: a plant with a maximum zone of 9b should require temperatures below 30°F in order to survive or be productive. If the plant does not actually require those freezing temperatures, please do not specify a maximum zone.

In the case of many plants, a maximum zone requirement (say zone 11, which is specified for many plants) would preclude them from being good house plants except where winter temps hit 50°F or lower inside, which isn't going to happen where there is climate control. The number of plants currently in the database with both "house plant" and "max zone 11" specified (a contradiction in most situations, in my view) is currently too great to be displayed on a simple search. But here are 30 plants which apparently require freezing temperatures and yet magically still work fine as house plants:

https://garden.org/plants/sear...

When in doubt, please do not specify a max zone. This is more likely to confuse people and propagate errors than it is to provide useful information.

Useful information Baja. I'm guilty of adding that information when I see it, despite the fact that I live up north where the only thing I'm interested in is the cold hardiness. I've never thought about it from a warm climate perspective, and what you say makes perfect sense.