This photo should be (could be) moved to Hylotelephium sieboldii 'Mediovariegatum':

I don't know how too but feel free if you want to, I agree that that is where it should go When I bought it it said Sedum sieboldii October daphne so that's where I put it.

If it didn't come with a cultivar name, it may be a mistake to guess at one.

I don't know how many different variegated cultivars there may be for that species, but as of 1958, newly established cultivar names cannot be all Latin (eg. mediovariegatum) as part of the international code on the subject (ICNCP).

The general database treatment of variegated cultivars using Latin names is incorrect according to this botanical code. All-Latin cultivar names are generally frowned on, if they are newly invented. Validly named taxa which were demoted to cultivars are allowed. I don't think the database should necessarily be changed, but this is what the plant naming requirements are, as I understand them. Please correct me if I misunderstand this code.

In any case, the name we have been using would describe the plant in a literal sense if it was variegated (lacking chlorophyll) down the middle of the leaves, which does appear to be the case. If one were to take the word (the invented name our database uses) and lump together all such plants, including a potential variety of different plants with medial variegation, but wider or narrower stripes, different color combinations, etc., that would be perfectly acceptable to me, if they didn't have a better unique name.

The image is fine where it is, and I don't see any particular need to move it.

Baja_Costero said:I don't know how many different variegated cultivars there may be for that species, but as of 1958, newly established cultivar names cannot be all Latin (eg. mediovariegatum) as part of the international code on the subject (ICNCP).

The general database treatment of variegated cultivars using Latin names is incorrect according to this botanical code. All-Latin cultivar names are generally frowned on, if they are newly invented. Validly named taxa which were demoted to cultivars are allowed. I don't think the database should necessarily be changed, but this is what the plant naming requirements are, as I understand them. Please correct me if I misunderstand this code.

In any case, the name we have been using would describe the plant in a literal sense if it was variegated (lacking chlorophyll) down the middle of the leaves, which does appear to be the case. If one were to take the word (the invented name our database uses) and lump together all such plants, including a potential variety of different plants with medial variegation, but wider or narrower stripes, different color combinations, etc., that would be perfectly acceptable to me, if they didn't have a better unique name.

The image is fine where it is, and I don't see any particular need to move it.

There is only one variegated cultivar, which is mediovariegatum. I suppose it can be changed to just variegata, which is what it is also sold as (but the same thing)