I just went in to upload a photo of Scutellaria tournefortii, and noticed that the sole existing image in the database didn't look anything like my plant. Scutellaria is one of those genera with lots of mislabeled plants and seeds going around, so I did some research, and convinced myself that my plant is likely the real thing. I posted to a new discussion of the existing photo: The thread "Likely not S. tournefortii" in Photo of Skullcap (Scutellaria) but I don't know if that gets anyone's attention. Is there a different way to flag a photo that's likely misplaced, if you don't know the proper taxon to send it to?

If you feel the genus is correct but are unsure what species it may be you can always propose to move it to the 'generic' skullcap entry...

Skullcap (Scutellaria)

that will get an admins attention and likely the attention of the poster of the picture to begin a discussion on what it may actually be.

That makes sense. I did so. By the way, the two current photos in the generic skullcap entry don't look like Scutellaria to me. Pretty sure at least one and quite possibly both of them are salvia...

Kudos for approaching in such a cordial way. Hoping for a fruitful discussion and database correction (if appropriate).

Rob, your first impulse was correct. Commenting on the photo is the best way of handling this. It starts a thread in the Plant Photos Forum, which is watched by all of the database admins and by many plant-savvy members, and it automatically sends a message to the owner of the photo. If you were to simply propose that the image be moved, the photo owner would not be notified, and it's likely that your proposal would be declined and you'd be asked to post a comment on the photo instead.

In this case, however, the photo owner is growitall, who is no longer active on the site, so her imput isn't necessary for the move.

Thanks for the explanation - that's how I'll go about it then.

zuzu said:In this case, however, the photo owner is growitall, who is no longer active on the site, so her imput isn't necessary for the move.

I didn't realize Lori was no longer active on the site. This may just be a busy time for her but I saw a post by her on the rock garden forum this past week: The thread "Kinds of rocks for rock garden?" in Rock Gardens forum

That post is from June 2014, Lin.

I really thought I'd seen growitall/Lori posting recently but it must have been a different Lori.

I am glad I hunted through this forum... This answers my question about the best way to handle what I believe are incorrect photos. I was going through Clematis virginiana photos and found at least three that have smooth leaves instead of the toothed of the native. There is one comment that mentions that the native and the Sweet Autumn Clematis often being confused.

There is a Hemerocallis cultivar in the database where all the pictures appear to be incorrect. It's 'Magic Dawn'. This is a commonly misrepresented cultivar, note the registration info says "rose pink self", which obviously doesn't match. For anyone who is an American Hemerocallis Society member, see the Fall 2011 AHS Daylily Journal, page 20, for an explanation that the bi-color usually sold as 'Magic Dawn' is actually 'Howdy'. There is also a picture of the real pink 'Magic Dawn' next to the purple and yellow bicolor on that page also, for comparison. AHS members can access the issue online on the AHS Portal at:
http://daylilies.site-ym.com/r...

I've drawn the attention of the AHS to their having the wrong photograph in their online database also, so will understand if ATP would prefer to wait until they have fixed theirs. But in that eventuality what is the proper ATP procedure? When I looked at commenting on the page as a whole it says not to comment on photographs.

Contacting @Calif_Sue would be the proper ATP procedure in this case. She'll clean up the entry.

OK, thanks. I don't know how long it will take the AHS to fix their picture, I think it's been about a month since I brought it up but I'll keep checking - unless Calif_Sue wants to go ahead anyway.

Thanks Zuzu tagging me and thanks Sue for alerting us, we can definitely make the changes here! I'll move all the photos over to Howdy, looks like we won't have any of the real Magic Dawn. I'll delete the nursery ones and then notify the other members the reason their images are being moved so they can correct their inventory names.
Usually, when we come across a wrong photo in an entry, (or you want to make any comment for a particular photo) you enlarge that photo and then make a comment and it starts a thread in the Plant Photos foum.

What you can do Sue is add a comment to the entry that this daylily is commonly sold as...and then go into the brief explanation. Guess we'll have to check that entry form time to time.
By the way, I haven't been an AHS member for years and I can see that entire journal just fine!

All cleaned up and 4 members notified, you can see the threads in the Plant Photos forum;
Daylily (Hemerocallis 'Magic Dawn')
Daylily (Hemerocallis 'Howdy')

After each person has responded, I'll ask Dave to delete those threads so as to not clutter up the Howdy entry, you can all 4 if you scroll down.

Calif_Sue said:

What you can do Sue is add a comment to the entry that this daylily is commonly sold as...and then go into the brief explanation. Guess we'll have to check that entry form time to time.
By the way, I haven't been an AHS member for years and I can see that entire journal just fine!

Thanks, should I do that for both entries, 'Magic Dawn' and 'Howdy'? Oops that you were able to see the DJ when not signed in! That must be because I was logged in to get the URL. When I just signed out of the AHS Portal to test it I wasn't able to access it by the normal route. The AHS now has Journals and other periodicals online from the 1940's to current for members to read/download! Quite a treasure trove.

Yes, if would be useful info for both entries I would think. Thanks Sue!

Thank you, it's done for both. I think there's probably a description mistake with 'Howdy' in the AHS Database - on checking to see how to describe it in my comments here (I stuck with just bicolor as a result). I noticed it says:

"Color: ORD/GYL3: Orange red dark petals with orange dark sepals bicolor"

According to my interpretation of ORD/GYL3 from the AHS abbreviations, that should be dark orange red petals, light yellow green sepals, bicolor.

Oh boy, what a tangled mess.