Talk:Freshwater pearl

I have made a substantial edit to the freshwater page, and I am certain that someone will request reference. I am currently writing an article for Gems and Gemology about the current state of the freshwater pearl industry in China. This article will appear in the next journal issue. The information in that article and this article come from research performed by myself and a writer from the GIA in Zhuji China. Here is a video log of the trip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8uXeSb7i5X0 JPShepherd

NPOV dispute The Product
"Freshadama" is a registered trademark of Jeremy Shepherd, the founder and owner of Pearl Paradise a small company in Los Angeles. Pearl Paradise uses it as the product name for their best freshwater pearls. It is absolutely not an industry accepted term for describing the quality of pearls. None of the recognized pearl grading and description systems, such as the GIA's Pearl Description System, use this word.

This is advertising a product name in disguise. It is inaccurate and misleading.

Use of this term violates Wikipedia's core principles of NPOV and Verifiability.

Here is the trademark information from the US Patent and Trademark Office website www.uspto.gov:

Word Mark 	 FRESHADAMA

Goods and Services 	IC 014. US 002 027 028 050. G & S: Pearls. FIRST USE: 20060200. FIRST USE IN

COMMERCE: 20060508

Standard Characters Claimed

Mark Drawing Code 	(4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK

Serial Number 	78880694

Filing Date 	May 10, 2006

Current Filing Basis 	1A

Original Filing Basis 	1A

Published for Opposition 	January 9, 2007

Registration Number 	3222436

Registration Date 	March 27, 2007

Owner 	(REGISTRANT) Shepherd, Jeremiah Paul INDIVIDUAL UNITED STATES

Attorney of Record 	Christopher J. Day

Type of Mark 	TRADEMARK

Register 	PRINCIPAL

Live/Dead Indicator 	LIVE

Pearlexpert 03:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Removed disputed section pending independant sources. Also removed spam links. Vsmith 00:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Reverted blanking of talk section and the re-insertion of the disputed section in the article by anon 76.166.28.41. Please discuss here and provide non-commercial source material. Note, google is not a source. Vsmith 02:16, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

If you disagree then post a message stating so. Do not change another editor's comments. Re-instated previous version. Vsmith 18:34, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Cultured?
Freshwater pearls are not necessarily cultured pearls. Scotland, Ireland, Austria, Germany and a number of other countries yield natural freshwater pearls, but not necessarily seawater ones. J.P.Lon 19:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

"...will only go through the treatment"
"These smaller factories perform the treatments [2] that are nearly universal to all freshwater pearls. The pearls are pre-treated in a warm and cold chemical solution and then bleached. The pearls that exhibit strong coloration will only go through the treatment." What does this last sentence mean? It's rather ambiguous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shadowcrow (talk • contribs) 11:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Hybridize those two species?
I don't think they can hybridize considering they are in different subfamilies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecoeric (talk • contribs) 21:48, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

That is incorrect. They are from the same subfamily. They are from family Unionidae, subfamily Unioninae, and from the same genus which is Hyriopsis. They can hybridize and produce fertile offspring.JPShepherd (talk) 16:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Pearlexpert (talk) 05:56, 5 August 2008 (UTC)