Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants/Archive2
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| Archives for WP:PLANTS | edit | |
|---|---|---|
|
|
||
| 1 | 2004-10 – 2005-07 | Ericales; example article; Orders; food/poison; plant stubs; monotypic genus redirects; cacti; Carex |
| 2 | 2005-07 – 2005-11 | Acer; peer review requests; common names; headers; WikiProject Fungi proposal; stub proposals |
| 3 | 2005-11 – 2006-01 | Hyphenated species names; common names; article titles; tropical fruits |
| 4 | 2006-01 – 2006-03 | silver leaf tree; flower resource; article content/taxonomy; Poa; Wikipedia 1.0 Project |
| 5 | 2006-03 – 2006-05 | APGII; template botanist; flora article; article titles; common names; synonyms |
| 6 | 2006-05 | Plant article naming conventions; common names; categories; NPOV |
| 7 | 2006-05 – 2006-06 | lists/categories; Cornus; tomatoes; Horticulture and Gardening WikiProject; FA candidates; hortibox; range maps; Trifolium |
| 8 | 2006-06-28 | userbox; project banner; plant infobox; naming conventions |
| 9 | 2006-06-28 – 2006-06-29 | Taxoboxes for flowering plants; APGII |
| 10 | 2006-06 – 2006-07 | Original research; taxoboxes; APGII; italics |
| 11 | 2006-07 | interwiki cleanup for moss; illustrations of plant articles |
| 12 | 2006-07 – 2006-11 | Maples; citrus; photos; flora common name convention; capitalization; Vinca minor |
| 13 | 2006-11 – 2007-01 | Biographies needed; common names; APG and taxoboxes; species templates; image quality; microformat |
Contents |
[edit] Genus: Acer
I think Acer (genus) may need an article. Acer is a disambiguation page, with about 8 articles about the genus Acer directed there. Unfortunatley there isn't an article about Acer (genus), should there be? --Commander Keane 04:20, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
- The simplest solution is to either redirect Acer (genus) to maple or to move maple to acer (genus). I'd tend toward the first. Circeus 14:06, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Quick overlook
Can someone have a look at Interrupted fern, Blue-bead lily and Golden clover for prose and vocabulary? Thanks in advance. Circeus 22:23, July 31, 2005 (UTC)
- Done. --Curtis Clark 00:43, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
Same for Common Milkweed. Circeus 19:05, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
- "Golden clover" done and moved to its usual name, Large Hop Trefoil. Point to make here: beware of the USDA plants database in particular, which is hopelessly bad at getting the common names of European plants completely wrong. So much so, that I'd recommend avoiding it completely when dealing with European, Asian, etc., species. And also when writing about European and Asian plants, their status as cultivated introductions in North America is a minor factoid to be placed low in the article, not taking precedence over their status as native plants in their homeland (see e.g. Large Hop Trefoil - my edits. When citing references and links for European plants, please look for British/European references, not American ones, which come with an American POV not suitable for non-American species. - MPF 00:19, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- While I appreciate your points about common names, and in this case I have no disagreement, I think it's important to remember that (1) introduced plants can be ecological dominants, under new names, in their adopted lands, and (2) there are plants (sorry, none come immediately to mind, unless you count Salsola pestifer) that are much more common and well-known in their adopted ranges than in their native lands. Both of these things are reasons that organisms should be listed by their scientific names. Unfortunately, that is not Wikipedia policy. --Curtis Clark 03:56, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
- Hi Curtis - Agreed there are a few exceptional cases, but they are rare. I also agree that organisms (plants in particular) should really be under scientific names, I've moved plenty of plant pages to sci names myself for exactly that sort of reason (including Salsola) - there's been some discussion on this at the parent talk page Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life, there's a strong feeling there that where common names cause the slightest confusion, move to the scientific, but it is not a full consensus, unfortunately. - MPF 09:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
- While I appreciate your points about common names, and in this case I have no disagreement, I think it's important to remember that (1) introduced plants can be ecological dominants, under new names, in their adopted lands, and (2) there are plants (sorry, none come immediately to mind, unless you count Salsola pestifer) that are much more common and well-known in their adopted ranges than in their native lands. Both of these things are reasons that organisms should be listed by their scientific names. Unfortunately, that is not Wikipedia policy. --Curtis Clark 03:56, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I rarely can get actual european sources, at least for the time being. That is another of the reasons I want to have other people review what I write (I addition to language issues). Soon I'm entering Uni and should be able to get better material for these flora articles. I'll try to limit myself to native american plants in the meantime (like the other were, I only wrote Golden Clover because I happened to have a picture of the plant and it didn't already exist). Circeus 00:55, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
- Hi Circeus - there's some available on the web (one option is to put the sci name in google advanced search and limit the search to .uk or .fr etc, domains); alternatively, drop me a query on my talk page. Hope you enjoy uni! - MPF 09:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
-
[edit] Headers
Some of the pages I've seen (I presume following the Ragwort example) look awful, because they have far too many double-bold (==Header==) headers. It doesn't look good with every two- or three- line paragraph having a separate large underlined header. Please keep to three or fewer headers, unless the page is a very long one! (more than three or four full screen heights, e.g. apple). Some of the headers used are pretty frightful too, notably "Distribution and multiplication" and "Botanical properties" - they look really yucky in everyday English.
Thanks! - MPF 00:19, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
- That's a point I've been worried myself, and I am guilty of producing too much headers, though I'm trying to refrain from that. Maybe just "description" and "distribution" would be more than enough, with multiplication strategies handled in "ecological aspects"?. I'm not even sure "botanical properties" makes any actual sense. Feel free to edit the Plant species template. Circeus 13:22, August 5, 2005 (UTC)
-
- Will do, might add some suggestions in <!-- --> tags too; I'll hold fire for a day or two though in case others want to comment too - MPF 13:46, 5 August 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- I ended up changing the headers today. Might as well add a ful taxobox too instead of a link. Circeus 15:52, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
-
[edit] WikiProject Fungi
Could we create a WikiProject Fungi or WikiProject Mushroom? I haven't seen one, and I'm willing to participate. — Stevey7788 (talk) 21:10, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
- I support such that idea. The best way to go around with it is create an empty wikiproject page (For an empty template look here, look up some people who have contributed to fungii on the english wiki and invite them. Oh, and please do add it to Wikipedia:List_of_WikiProjects. TeunSpaans 18:17, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
- I'd be willing to help out with this too. It looks like no action has been taken on this since the original request, but the Fungi need a whole lot of work. Is anyone else interested in a Fungi WikiProject? Mycota 22:33, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] as usual...
If someone could check at Broadleaf arrowhead. Circeus 15:51, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Stub proposals
This seems a good place to mention that the Stub sorting project is proposing two new subcategory stubs to break up the 8 page monster listing under Cat:Plant stubs. Specifically, I've proposed {{succulent-stub}} and {{grass-stub}}. If you have an opinion in the matter, just post it on the Stub proposal page under the appropriate header. -- EncycloPetey 16:15, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
