Talk:Tree shaping/List of potential title names

Tree shaping
Link to checked references 42 


 * Use of Tree shaping, tree shapers and variations in fantasy.

Martin felt these quotes below and others were too vague, so I created this subsection.
 * Related to Tree shaping Quotes,


 * Shaping plants through inosculation to form useful or artistic items


 * Shaping plants through inosculation


 * Shaping plants to form useful or artistic items


 * Insoculation sculpture

Biotecture

 * Tree Circus

Tree training

 * Tree sculpture

Comment here about the above references please
To keep the references easy to read please make your comments here.

Tree shaping No.01 Comment on photo: Looks like a topiary, as the evergreen foliage defines the shape of the boat. Slowart (talk) 09:10, 14 August 2010


 * In the first section, items 4,5,7,8,11,12,13,15,17,18,19,21,22,23,25,26,27,29,30,31,32,33,35,36 do not actually contain the term 'tree shaping' but simply some combination of a form of the noun 'tree' in varying degree of proximity to some form of the verb 'shape'. Martin Hogbin (talk) 20:03, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Noted, thou some of them use shaping trees, shaped tree or that type of thing and should stay. The others I'll moved to a sub section of that section so they are still accessible and other editors can decide whether they are relevant or not for themselves. I do that next week.  Blackash   have a chat 23:57, 8 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Martin I moved 4,7,12,13,15,17,29,30,33,35. to a subsection. I'm changing the numbers after this edit. Blackash   have a chat 22:36, 10 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Looks like many of the "tree shaping" references are contained within articles that are titled arborsculpture or uses the word arborsculpture in paragraphs before or after. For example 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 of "Tree Shaping" are simply quoting various ways of using of the verb "shaping" in the body of a book about arborsculpture. Slowart (talk) 04:35, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Tree shaping is used in books and articles about the art form that are in no way linked to arborsculpture. Though tree shaping, shaping trees or shaped tree is used alot as a descriptive phrase for Arborsculpture. Tree shaping is used for our work (Pooktre) and also by others in this field. Which was the point, broaden the title until it become neutral and doesn't lead to one artist. Thank you for pointing out that Tree shaping and variations are also linked to Arborsculpture and not just Pooktre. Blackash   have a chat 04:32, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Many helpful links here. Slowart (talk) 04:56, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * In Arborsculpture
 * 4, 6, and 10 seem have dead links.
 * 7 Where Konstantin Kirsch is writing about Arborsculpture his text is mostly a copy and paste from your site site on the 15 April 2008 which is almost word for word what was on wikipeida about that time. 20:36, 8 April 2008 This is a circular reference which is a problem.
 * 14 is a directory listing, do they even count?
 * 15 is based upon a press release, and the writer seems a bit confused, example stating that bonsai is a form of arborsculpture. Blackash   have a chat 06:14, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Can we prune this list of potential titles down ? I removed "Circus Trees" as I'm pretty sure it's copyrighted by Gilroy Gardens. Slowart (talk) 19:24, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think we can remove Biotecture, Grown furniture, Pleaching, Living Art, Tree art, as they are all unusable as titles. I also think we can move the page for a time to The art of training trees into useful or artistic items as that was just agreed to (mostly). Slowart (talk) 05:44, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Please don't remove any of the suggested titles, as this page is a resource for editors wanting to know what are the refs for the different names. I got more refs to add but don't have time until Tuesday. Blackash   have a chat 14:43, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hopefully we could work together to reduce the volume, saving other editors scroll time at least. let's remove the ref "How to grow a chair The art of Tree Trunk Topiary, as it is (self published by a non-expert) or at least condense 4 to 10 in the tree shaping table into one please, along with 15-20, ect. Slowart (talk) 17:29, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Slowart, a quick note, I condense 4-10 on Tuesday Australian time. Blackash   have a chat 12:16, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Slowart please don't remove quotes, I have started condensing the entries and will get around to all of them. I will only do a few on my main editing day. The quotes are there so editors can easily assess in what context the wording is used and the relevancy of each entry for themselves. Blackash   have a chat 09:24, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok I've managed to get all present entries condensed. I upload some more refs next week. Blackash   have a chat 10:10, 28 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Mr Reames- Glancing over this dispute I see a tendency towards pithy pronouncements w/o much support from facts or reasoning. Opinions count here, but they get you only so far in argument. For example- I can understand "Biotecture, Grown furniture" & "Living Art, Tree art" may be neologisms. But why have you lumped the historically precedent term Pleaching in with your "unusable" list? Pleaching is the traditional term for the art as far as I know. Hilar leo  Hey, L.E.O. 14:24, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Mr Hilarleo- the account Reames| Reames  don't talk here has been closed. Can you afford me a tiny shred of privacy that you may also enjoy please? No worries... Pleaching is well defined in botanical literature. Pleaching techniques involve braiding as in pleating, the natural outcome is that the branches tend to grow together. This is where the similarity ends, do we want to describe a living tree chair (for example) as pleaching? Some folks think that when branches grow together that would be referred to as pleaching or grafting or Inosculation and in some ways it is, but it is not accurate nor is it helpful in an encyclopedia. IMHO there is a preponderance of reliable verifiable sources for arborsculpture, but then I have COI so you are welcome to ignore me IMO.The Home Orchard Purde university horticulture department *University of California Cooperative Extension*Horticultural Reviews *Grad Thesis *University of California pressThe best of the crop is see pdf page 6 text book page 442 section 4. Slowart (talk) 18:17, 15 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Dear Mr. Slowart:
 * I am happy to address you by one account of your choosing. otoh I happily use one unique ID across the interwebs. I seek no special 'privacy'- but only your gentleness.
 * re Titles, I have only seen such contention where there is financial COI. I sense this is the case here. Now, the fact that a term may be used occasionally by UC Extension et al. may be significant. The question here is if there are any better 'Title' choices.


 * First- I dont have OED online, but re Topiary => "1590s, from L. topiarius "of or pertaining to ornamental gardening," from topia "ornamental gardening," from Gk. topia, pl. of topion, originally "a field," dim. of topos "place." The noun is first recorded 1908, from the adj".
 * This describes what you do. We can visit OED as needed. Will I find your title there? If so I might more happily accept it.


 * Second- You have innovated, true. But you are hardly the first to innovate in the field- Just the first to seek WP validation and its fame in the first-person. This alone is a poor use of WP.
 * Now time only will tell if your neologism deserves WP:Notability. But speaking as partner to a lifelong fan of 'Toops'- I/we never heard of either of these  competing neologisms ["arborsculpt" v. "tree-shape"] [before last week]- & I, for one, object strongly to the use of WP:neologism of any unclear notability as topic titles.


 * My objection is strengthened in particular wherever there are
 * • multiple questions of more generic & more historically-precedent examples of essentially equivalent material -
 * • any appearance of COI activism, careerism, or potential gain.


 * Does your sense of privacy afford WP users any peek at your work? You have now made a strong case for Pooktre technique [seen at her website] as Pleaching. Assuming the outcomes appear generally similar to the public mind, which case has been indicated- IMO both your techniques belong under some more general Ornamental garden article, with redirects for your neologisms a later possibility.
 * ...Unfortunately I have seen what I believe is some intransigent, activist intent, and an effective categorical objection to any re-naming of the article(s) under contention. Thus I continue to vote For editor-banning.  Hilar leo  Hey, L.E.O.


 * in the OED ? Is that a requirement? 1995 was the first use. WP:neologism was debated vigorously by other editors who seamed to understand Wiki more than I. And I don't follow any of your claims about my strong case for Pooktre techniques, I think your confused. You can find my work @ arborsmith.com and peak all you want. Activism for my word is NOT why I'm here. I just can't standby an watch a editor abuse my word my work and Wikipedia all at the same time. You really don't need my help if the topic ban is in place. PeaceSlowart (talk) 04:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)


 * See if the current list of authoritative sources for use of the word arborsculpture to describe this craft helps to make the picture any more clear. They are detailed in the article, restored to the place that several important ones were oddly deleted from during my wiki-hiatus, there at Tree shaping alongside the word arborsculpture.  Also, please enjoy the recently posted nine new authoritative resources, that have never graced this article before and which also use the term arborsculpture to describe this craft.  I'll be expanding the article using these sources, and actively seeking out and adding others.  I am fairly certain these will withstand any test of their reliability, verifiability, and neutral point of view.  As will I:  No financial involvement, nothing to gain except a better article about a topic I find fascinating and defense of the mighty pillars that provide a comfortable digital home for me to write in.  Prove otherwise and I suppose you could spend your time as Blackash did, attempting fruitlessly to somehow discredit or disqualify me, too. You'd be wasting your effort though, because Time has already told this one, HilarLeo.  It's not even controversial, except for here on wiki, and only for the duration of the fantasy reign of Blackash.  Do keep watching the OED though; they'll catch up sooner or later as they usually do.  Good thing it's not a requirement for inclusion in the Wikipedia or we'd have a LOT of articles to delete!
 * What the hell on earth is Toops, anyway.....some sort of obscure regional television program? I don't watch TV and Google yields nothing of any significance, unless you meant Topps maybe?  Baseball cards?  I don't get that reference at all, and if it was supposed to convey some sense of being authoritative in any way...sorry, that one's flopped.  I also don't see a single example of pleaching among the Pooktre works, which are publicized EVERYWHERE, though point one out to me if you do and I'll eat that hat right away and document it accordingly on the article page while I'm chewing.  I should be chewing something now, come to think of it, not just looking at the stove. Meanwhile, happy tree bending, arborsculptors!  Step awaaay from the wiki now, wouldja please, and get out there and go craft some more great live wood stuff!  Keep the pictures coming too, and keep writing about your work and accomplishments where we can find it!  Love this stuff.  Cheers!   d u f f   09:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC)