Talk:Hypericum perforatum (flowering tops) - Revision history

Elan at 20:02, 1 April 2013

2013-04-01T20:02:00Z

Admin at 19:58, 1 April 2013

2013-04-01T19:58:18Z

Elan at 19:43, 1 April 2013

2013-04-01T19:43:18Z

PAxentiev at 23:14, 26 March 2013

2013-03-26T23:14:41Z

PAxentiev: Created page with 'Hi all, I just did a bunch of changes, jumping back and forth. Sorry if it caused confusion in the page's register, this was my training session. =) A couple of points I do want …'

2013-03-26T20:00:40Z

Created page with 'Hi all, I just did a bunch of changes, jumping back and forth. Sorry if it caused confusion in the page's register, this was my training session. =) A couple of points I do want …'

New page

Hi all, I just did a bunch of changes, jumping back and forth. Sorry if it caused confusion in the page's register, this was my training session. =)
A couple of points I do want to bring up:
I moved the Alkemist's voucher pictures to "Botanical entries" section, as I believe that's where they should belong. We should really discuss this, once and for all: what goes into botanical entries and what goes into macroscopic entries? Perhaps, it is a topic that needs to be clarified at one of the upcoming general teleconferences. My personal opinion is that vouchers should be in the botanical section, views of whole plant should be in the botanical section, and any pictures of fresh whole plant parts should be in the botanical section. It would be good to point out some distinguishing characters of the plant (this refers to any section) to make the illustrations somewhat more informative. Otherwise, you can't really tell from this voucher if it is Hypericum perforatum or Hypericum maculatum, for example. I mean, if we go into botanical ID, we should at least do it well, otherwise it becomes a bunch of pretty pictures with little real value. This applies to any other section just as well.
As for macroscopic entries, they, in my opinion, should include images of raw material as it is received by manufacturers or circulated commercially.
Thanks!
Pavel
AHP

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:02, 1 April 2013
Line 30:		Line 30:
	Merle		Merle
	American Herbal Products Association		American Herbal Products Association
		+
		+	Thanks Merle!!!

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:58, 1 April 2013
Line 19:		Line 19:
	Elan		Elan
	Alkemists		Alkemists
		+
		+
		+
		+
		+	Hi everyone, (And again welcome to the wiki, AHP!)
		+
		+	I'm setting up a schedule for us all to meet together with the editing team, and I'll make our next meeting have an agenda item on these suggestions for rearrangements to the site layout to make it more sensible and easy to use for our experts who are using the wiki as part of their botanical authentication toolsets. I'll send a note around by email later on this week with a suggested meeting date. Until then, the editing is looking great! Keep it up, everyone!
		+
		+	Best,
		+	Merle
		+	American Herbal Products Association

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:43, 1 April 2013
Line 8:		Line 8:

	I also updated a bit the botanical description.		I also updated a bit the botanical description.
		+
		+
		+
		+	HI Pavel,
		+
		+	Welcome!!! We are all glad you and AHP are now joining us.
		+	Just a point of clarification, before you go ahead and move anything lets allow a discussion of such idea/s by the editing team prior too...
		+	Thanks
		+
		+	Elan
		+	Alkemists

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:14, 26 March 2013
Line 6:		Line 6:
	Pavel		Pavel
	AHP		AHP
		+
		+	I also updated a bit the botanical description.