Talk:Banksia menziesii
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Banksia menziesii is part of WikiProject Banksia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the plant genus Banksia and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. | |
| Mid | This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
Banksia menziesii has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
 |
An entry from Banksia menziesii appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 21 June 2006. |
 |
++Lar: t/c 00:29, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Naming
Is this named after Robert Menzies Gnangarra 09:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
- no I been looking it was after a botanist Gnangarra 10:05, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] galleries and images
I guess this begs the question how the best way to illustrate an article. My original idea is a pic or two in the story, which then became a gallery and is now shifted off to commons (where the gallery is). I am inclined to have one or two pix on the page. Comments? Cas Liber 02:37, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- I think that a couple of informative pictures in a gallery with detailed descriptions is better than blank image in a commons cat Gnangarra 02:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry about that guys. When I moved them into a gallery I hadn't anticipated them being removed altogether.
- The principle adopted by some (maybe most) Wikipedians (including me) is: does this image illustrate a point in the text? Images that do not are removed. Good captioning can help here. Why is the yellow image there? To illustrate the point that B. menziesii inflorescences come in attractive colour variants? Then the caption should say something like: "Banksia menziesii inflorescenses come in a number of attractive colour variants, as shown by this unusual yellow inflorescense on a tree at Cataby, Western Australia". With a good caption like that, it is almost impossible to justify removing the image.
- A better example is in the current Banksia article, where it appears that we have used two images to illustrate response to fire. We really ought to recaption these to explicitly state that one illustrates death of the parent and germination from seed, whereas the other shows resprouting from a lignotubor.
- Snottygobble 12:25, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- good idea Cas Liber 17:24, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
How exactly is the current layout preferable to this? The same images and information are included. Mgiganteus1 05:56, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
Well, I like images sprinkled through the article and wouldn't have minded the other way, but those in the know tell me that galleries are not good for featured articles. I do appreciate others having a go though. Welcome aboard :) Cas Liber 06:10, 21 June 2006 (UTC) Cheers Cas Liber 06:10, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
- Mgiganteus1, I have no objection to them being in a gallery, and indeed I put them in a gallery myself about a week ago. Immediately someone removed them altogether on the grounds that a gallery was not needed for an article with a commons link. I think this was not a good outcome so I reverted to the "sprinkled" version. I reverted your edit on the expectation that the images would again be removed altogether if I did not. Snottygobble 12:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] PR suggestion
- This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 2(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.
- Its too short for FA, most species article will be. Gnangarra 01:13, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
- Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -
between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18 mm. - Per WP:MOSNUM, at Units of measurement, numbers with SI units of measure should have conversions in US customary units and vice versa. These conversions should keep to similar values of precision. For example, "the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth". Note that the converted unit of measure uses a standard abbreviation, while the source unit is spelled out in the text.
- As is done in WP:FOOTNOTE, for footnotes, the footnote should be located right after the punctuation mark, such that there is no space inbetween. For example, change blah blah [2]. to blah blah.[2]
[edit] Comments
- The opening paragraph should briefly define B. menziesii, say what is interesting or unusually about it, and then very briefly summarise anything of interest in the rest of the article. Who it was named after should be moved to some other section.
- The "Description" section is good except that it includes some ecological notes such as flowering time and response to fire. These should be moved into an "Ecology" section. Ecology section should also include info from genus article (e.g. pollinated by birds primarily, also bees and mammals; vulnerable to dieback) but with a special emphasis on any ecological aspects unique to the species (e.g. it has an unusually low seed set).
- Distribution and habitat section is okay but perhaps a little short. Is there anything else to say?
- Cultivation section is okay, but should mention that it is slow-growing, has an unpredictable form, flowers in 6-10 years from seed, tolerates hard pruning.
- I still think the image placement is unsatisfactory, but i don't know what the solution is.
- I propose removing the "Subgenus", "Section" and "Series" entries from the taxobox, thus reclaiming some room on the right hand side. Instead, introduce a "Taxonomy" section that states what subgenus, section and series it is in. Taxonomy section would be an appropriate place to state after whom it is named (i.e. move this from introduction), when it was discovered, the fact that no species closely resembles it but B. speciosa is probably the closest relative.
I'll come back later to help with this. Snottygobble 04:48, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
There was a paper called "Floret opening in Banksia Menziesii" that florets mainly opened in response to foraging by birds, but not bees, making birds the most important pollinator. Also a paper called "Self-incompatibility, Protandry, Pollen Production and Pollen Longevity in Banksia menziesii" which found that B. menziesii pollen is self-incompatible. i.e. it cannot fertilise itself. I'll read these some time and include the information. Snottygobble 05:02, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] To Do
- brief taxonomy, link to Taxonomy of Banksia
- brief ecology, link to Ecology of Banksia
[edit] Distribution map
First version of distribution based on flora base information, any issues suggestions etc before adding to the article somewhere. Gnangarra 12:18, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
