Thanks to all who have added to this conversation. This topic comes up once in a while, and we usually settle to a similar conclusion as already stated by several people. For fuzzy taxa that don't quite fit our wiki definition, we only include them if they don't belong to a group of plants that have many people dedicated to them and where lots of good resources and cultural information are already available. The succulents belong to this group. I think the wiki generally picks up weird taxa that don't quite fit into any one group's interest. Despite this, we still get good hits on these pages. This brings us to Dylan's question: > I don't know why it is the case that there should be a random sampling of a > few orchid genera on the wiki and a few aroids (groups with their own > dedicated fan clubs) while these decidedly geophytic succulent genera have > been omitted, but it would be good to ad some of the latter to balance the > necessarily heavy weight of the petaloid monocots. > The random sampling all has to do with people interested in working on the pages. It's the same with omission, we didn't omit them on purpose, but they appear omitted because no one had create a page for them. If anyone has an interest in their group (say geophytic succulents) the wiki space is open. And finally, why not orchids with pseudobulbs? The "pseudobulb" on the Whatisabulb page refers to fleshy pseudobulbs such as those found in Crinum and Ismene. When we get to epiphytic orchids, there's a whole world out there with many, many societies (almost one in every major city) and many dozens of forums. With so much resources and human power dedicated to them, the PBS wiki does not need to be involved and we have decided to focus its power generally on geophytes. And another reason for exclusion is that the majority of them would never survive the cultural treatments that we use to grow most bulbs. Nhu