Tall Bearded Iris (Iris 'Agrippa')

The iris photo from Cayeux is right, the others are wrong of course.

Well that is a problem! I wonder if the one who posted the other pictures was sent that iris with the wrong tag. Many people wouldn't know they were sent the wrong iris.

Yep, that needs fixed. @Calif_Sue Suzanne, can you remedy?

http://wiki.irises.org/bin/vie...

often reading the description can tell the tale.............."old gold standards"

I'm not positive, but I believe the "purplish" pictures were *probably* taken at a botanical garden, in France (several of the other photos from that contributor were)........so, it's likely either "labeled in error", or a case of just posted the "wrong" photo, with the *right* name

I do not understand how people dare to post wrong pictures when a description is available (I.e. in the link to Twiki the picture from IrisParadise is OBVIOUSLY wrong.
For the information of ALL ATP members I checked some French irises recently posted in the database. A new 'member' posted a lot of WRONG irises. I noticed among others 'funny' information an iris with the wrong spelling, the wrong hybridizer, the wrong parentage, self instead of plicata, yellow iris when it is red, and so on. Nobody can expect from me to amend hundred of irises which have been approved according unknown information. I have always tried to share good photograhs and right information. The pictures are taken in my garden and I have many plants to enjoy and study. In no way I would run around the botanical gardens to make believe about some knowledge I do not have and just copy the tags and post. I disagree totally with this kind of practice to 'increase' (???) any database. Both Cubits and ATP were having very reliable database, it will be too bad that all this becomes totally beyond control.
Cowrita: tags can be moved in botanical gardens. As far as the irises are on a vetting process no one has the right to go, shoot and post, overall when knowing NOTHING about irises especially about historics. That leads to spoil both the reputation of the botanical garden and the work that is done to spread right information.. .

Wow! I'm at a loss for words. But clearly someone got pee in there bowl of wheaties this morning.

When errors are found in the database, there are at least three methods of reasonably addressing the situation.

1. (my preferred approach) Contact the owner of the picture directly through a Tree Mail ask if they are certain of the ID. Generally, the owner will acknowledge the error and propose the deletion of the picture. My approach to managing the database is that, when people propose deleting THEIR OWN photos, it gets approved quickly and without question.

2. There is a section at the bottom of each picture page for comments. You can make a comment in this section questioning the proper ID of the plant in the picture. The person who posted the picture will receive notification of the comment and anyone who frequents the Plant Photos Forum will see the comment as well. A discussion can then be had about what should be done with the picture.

3. You can simply propose the deletion of the picture (or move it to the correct entry, if known). However, when one member proposes deleting another member's picture, I won't do anything until I've had a chance to talk to the owner of the picture myself. So, expect such proposals to sit in the queue for awhile.

Complaining in the forums (or in Tree Mails to the database moderators or admins) might accomplish what you want, but the odds of success are considerably lower than the three methods listed above.

And I have done what Kent suggested in #2

How this can be possible please?????

It's called human error, plain and simple.

This thread was locked. Unfair. To answer the last comment one 'error' can be 'human', repeatly errors from the same person cannot be approved by the moderators of the database in view both of the members and the respect due to proper and right knowledge..

I agree that a member who has repeatedly posted erroneous pictures should get greater scrutiny from the database administrators. I am not sure how the ability to post to the database is for others. I just know that I have the ability to post and my pictures will go right up without any oversight. Only afterwards, if there is an issue brought up by someone else, will the database administrator look at the picture and then decide a course of action.

Some of the descriptions from the 1920's & 1930's is VERY vague and hard to associate with any pictures posted as they are very open to interpretation.

We all want the best picture & information repository possible and we strive for this. We can help out our volunteer administrators by pointing out issues and let the process take its course.

my 2 cents.

When you are confusing a plicata with a self and a red with a yellow you can easiluy conclude that the poster has no information at all about the irises. No matter of the checklists on which you cannot find some of them. So I could make you believe that a carot is a potatoe and vice-versa if you never saw any ever. As a French citizen I have my word to say as I do appreciate the will of accuracy of both Cubits and ATP database and wIIl prevent anyone to spoil this.
Thank you fo your 2 cents Greg!

Futhermore I would appreciate to know according which criteria many wrong (French) irises have been approved??? The approval rely on which data?

I would assume you are speaking mostly about old historics and not newly introduced cultivars. With new stuff, there is a lag between the time the hybridizers post it on their websites and when the information is published by the AIS (American Iris Society). And that is the source we use for this site as to definitive data resource (I could be wrong and await an administrator to verify).

I agree with you if a poster is SO blatant with multiple pictures that are wrong, that their all of their future contributions would be quarantined and not posted to the cultivars until vetted by an administrator. Furthermore, If feel that all of that posters contributions should then be reviewed for the same problems/issues. If that too is found to be suspect; then I feel that all of their contributions should be removed/quarantined until the issue is resolved. But I am not an admin and I do not know what the proceedures are for this type of issue.

Did some of the pictures you are questioning have signs with names on them? Like they were at some botanical garden? Could it be that the poster is posting mistakes made by the place they visited rather than purposefully doing it on their own? has this person responded to any inquires about their postings?

By the way, I am not mad at anyone about this issue. Quite the opposite. I think we need to have these types of discussions because we all want the same thing. A go to site that is correct/accurate, with pretty pictures. We may not agree with the way it is managed all the time, but as long as that management is consistant; I can't complain.

I'll post this again just for emphasis:

When errors are found in the database, there are at least three methods of reasonably addressing the situation.

1. (my preferred approach) Contact the owner of the picture directly through a Tree Mail ask if they are certain of the ID. Generally, the owner will acknowledge the error and propose the deletion of the picture. My approach to managing the database is that, when people propose deleting THEIR OWN photos, it gets approved quickly and without question.

2. There is a section at the bottom of each picture page for comments. You can make a comment in this section questioning the proper ID of the plant in the picture. The person who posted the picture will receive notification of the comment and anyone who frequents the Plant Photos Forum will see the comment as well. A discussion can then be had about what should be done with the picture.

3. You can simply propose the deletion of the picture (or move it to the correct entry, if known). However, when one member proposes deleting another member's picture, I won't do anything until I've had a chance to talk to the owner of the picture myself. So, expect such proposals to sit in the queue for awhile.

This is also true for information contained within the database. Any member of ATP, if they see information that they believe to be wrong, can click the "EDIT" button and propose to fix it. The proposal will be reviewed by an admin and either approved or denied. That's how the database gets better.

Complaining in the forums (or in Tree Mails to the database moderators or admins) might accomplish what you want, but the odds of success are considerably lower than the three methods listed above.

I'll also add this: broad spectrum demands like "You better delete ALL the French historis posted by this dummY." (a direct quote from a Tree Mail I recently received) are virtually guaranteed to be ignored.

If you would like to point out specific errors in the database, Clusiana, I am happy to discuss them with you and address them as necessary.

If you want to rant and rave, this thread can be locked again.

Misawa77 said:

Did some of the pictures you are questioning have signs with names on them? Like they were at some botanical garden? Could it be that the poster is posting mistakes made by the place they visited rather than purposefully doing it on their own? has this person responded to any inquires about their postings?

Anyone who takes very many pictures at botanical gardens, display gardens, or commercial growers ends up with at least a few that are mislabeled. It happens, even in the best of gardens (I've seen mislabeled irises at Schreiner's, as just one example) :shrug:

I know for myself, it didn't really occur to me that the plants in those sorts of places might not be labeled correctly until I uploaded some in the Database and someone emailed me to say 'Hey, your picture of X is wrong'. I've been more careful since then, but suspect most people learn the way I did, the hard way.

In a crowd-sourced database with 60,000 entries, errors are inevitable. They are not a big deal so long as people are willing to work to find and fix them.

The question was 'On which data did you rely on to approve the wrong irises????
Greg
"has this person responded to any inquires about their postings?" The moderators might know.
Kent
"errors are inevitableThey are not a big deal so long as people are willing to work to find and fix them"
We are not at the nursery school anymore Kent. People are responsible for what they are doing
and you are responsible to make up right or bad decisions.
Most of the members know that I am posting since years. I do not 'rant and rave' (by the way I can imagine but do not know and NEVER heard these words)
Fo a matter of fact most of the historics are wrong. I just thought about the members interested by historics and if you read MY post that I will not put back here for 'emphasis' you cannot expect from me to amend hundred of entries. That would be time consuming for me, for you, and the others admins.
I am not impressed by figures. You do not manage all the plants of the database.

Thank you for letting me know that you are quoting publicly private corespondence. I mean a tree mail sent to you to warn you about wrong entries in the database and thank you for your comment 'If you want to rant and rave, this thread can be locked again.

Added after the thread being locked
I was teasing you. I meant that it is unfair to quote private correspondence as it is unfair to lock the thread as I think that the members have the right to express themselves about this matter. As you write it yourself That's unfortunate, as I believe a discussion about errors in the Iris Database is certainly worth having. '

I guess "locked" is your choice then. That's unfortunate, as I believe a discussion about errors in the Iris Database is certainly worth having. Another time and place, perhaps.

Yes they have responded, in a very kind and understanding way too and the images were moved.