Talk:Papilionanthe Miss Joaquim

Untitled

The 'origin' section seems rather odd. Chensiyuan 05:38, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay

Joaquim Vanda misses a photograph! Please help. --DLL 22:14, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Since this article contains information presented by sources which hold diametrically opposed views, identifying each source should help make the contents less odd and less confusing.--J. A.

hi

Your stuff is great info for my brocure on Singapore keep it up what is your name? I need it for my bibliography could you write it on your article for me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.148.2.186 (talk) 05:56, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

This article presented only one version of the story, the version concocted by an amateur historian who is an Armenian nationalist is favored only by a few hobby growers. No orchid scientist accepts this version. I added the version favored by orchid scientists a few days ago, but it was removed immediately. I added it again on 29 December 2009, 11:30 pm California time. It was removed again. A person who does not sign his/her name keeps changing the article to present only one side of the story. Those interested in the version favored by scientists should refer to the chapter by J. Arditti and C. S. Hew in orchid Biology Reviews and Perspectives, Volume IX which was edited by T. Kull, S.M. Wong and myself and published by the New York Botanical Garden Press-- Professor Joseph Arditti —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.96.93.155 (talk) 07:29, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I just recovered my log in information. The edit of the article which added another view to make it well rounded and fair is by me. So is the preceding paragraph. It is sad and unethical to have to contend with removal of information which is intended to make an article well balanced. If nothing else, removing information which balances an articles is an indication extremist Armenian nationalism. --Professor Joseph Arditti —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarditti (talk • contribs) 07:55, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Wikipedia's articles are not written by just one person: rather, it is the result of continued effort from the community. This article is a stub. If you feel that there is not enough information here, you can try to expand it, but do remember that information must be verifiable and there must be no original research. If you feel that the text is unsalvagely incoherent, you may list it for speedy deletion, but please look at the criteria for this. If you would like to have more freedom in editing, you should register for an account, by clicking this link. Please remember the policies and guidelines of Wikipedia and do not vandalise, lest you be blocked or banned by administrators. But when dealing with edits that look like vandalism, always assume good faith and do not insult the vandals. If it is truly vandalism, issue user warnings and if they continue report them to the admins' noticeboard. It is not permitted to use multiple accounts in a harmful manner, but do not assume sock puppetry is being conducted. Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point: this has been conducted before and may result in you getting a bad reputation on Wikipedia and you will probably end up here. Lastly, just don't be a d***. Failure to comply may result in being banned.

I hope this welcome message has been overly comprehensive and overly long. If you have any further questions, you may ask at the help desk or the village pump. If you would like to return me comments, do so at my talk page. I hope you like it here and enjoy being a Wikipedian! Professor M. Fiendish, Esq. 09:36, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

My use of Jarditti has raised questions. This may be because I may be registered as jarditti. Is registration case sensitive? Sorry. Jarditti (talk) 08:24, 2 January 2010 (UTC)Professor Joseph Arditti

History I find it interesting that those who credit Miss Agnes Joaquim with breeding rather than finding the orchid are not willing to allow an opinion other than theirs to be included in this entry. The proper and ethical approach would be to present both views. Also, I sign my revisions. The other side only uses a log in name. Joseph Arditti, Professor of Biology Emeritus, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jarditti (talk • contribs) 06:48, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Because it sounds like libel. Henry Ridley recorded that Miss Joaquim bred the orchid. The nastiness came much later. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 14:58, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Vanda 'Miss Joaquim'. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426164836/http://infopedia.nl.sg/articles/SIP_752_2005-01-10.html to http://infopedia.nl.sg/articles/SIP_752_2005-01-10.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:01, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Correct naming

The current name as used for the article title and as mentioned in the text has several issues:

1. The part « Miss Joaquim » should not be in single quotes, because it is a grex name rather than a cultivar.
2. The genus name is now Papilionanthe rather than Vanda.

Here are two references for confirmation:

• http://apps.rhs.org.uk/horticulturaldatabase/orchidregister/orchiddetails.asp?ID=70997
• http://bluenanta.com/orchid/100070997/hybrid_detail/?tab=sum

The first of those references is to the Royal Horticultural Society, which is the registrar for orchid names.

There is also the book Biology of Vanda Miss Joaquim by De Choy Sin Hew, Tim Wing Yam, and Joseph Arditti. I can't copy-paste the text of book here because I only have access to it via Google Books, but it confirms on Page 2 that « Papilionanthe Miss Joaquim » is the correct name, and that it has a cultivar named 'Agnes', giving the full name « Papilionanthe Miss Joaquim 'Agnes' ». The book also states that is is the grex Papilionanthe Miss Joaquim that is the national flower of Singapore, rather than the particular cultivar.

Note: As an orchid which is often mentioned in non-horticultural circles, this orchid is subject to having its name mangled a lot.

If there are no objections, I will make the corresponding changes.–Jérôme (talk) 11:07, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 8 April 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Papilionanthe Miss Joaquim by User:Jérôme. (non-admin closure) Iffy★Chat -- 12:07, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

---

Vanda 'Miss Joaquim' → Vanda Miss Joaquim – The correct name of this orchid does not include the quotes. See Talk:Vanda_'Miss_Joaquim'#Correct_naming. The new name is at the moment a redirect to this page. Jérôme (talk) 10:31, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

@Jérôme: Given what you've presented above, why are you not requesting to move to Papilionanthe Miss Joaquim (or should that be Papilionanthe Miss Joaquim grex; ICNCP permits either, and I'm not aware of any other grex articles on Wikipedia that would provide a precedent)? Plantdrew (talk) 14:14, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Papilionanthe Miss Joaquim would of course also be good; I mainly wanted to get rid of the quotes, which are clearly wrong, but yes, the name should indeed be Papilionanthe Miss Joaquim. I'll change the move request template. Cheers–Jérôme (talk) 09:24, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

As for the "grex" part, I would not include it. I couldn't find another article about a specific grex on Wikipedia, but I reckon that in most cases, the name of the orchid is used without "grex".–Jérôme (talk) 09:26, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

• Support move to Papilionanthe Miss Joaquim. Grex epithets are not enclosed in single quotes (see the ICNCP, articles 4, 16, 23). Plantdrew (talk) 15:43, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

April 14: I've performed the move (which I was now able because the target name with "Papilionanthe" was not yet a redirect), and changed the article to reflect the genus name "Papilionanthe".–Jérôme (talk) 15:22, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moved from article page

I moved the following from the article page: (Please include only verifiable statements, rather than opinions or conjectures. Ps, Is there a reference for this?)–Jérôme (talk) 13:12, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Despite claims of a few years ago, Miss Agness Joaquim did not breed this orchids. She found a seedling of a natural hybrid in a clump of bamboom. In my (Joseph Arditti) view the claim that Miss Agness Joaquim bred the orchid was and is driven by nationalism gender bias, both factors which must bever ever be allowed to affect science.