User talk:82.71.15.212

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Your edit to the Paul Maas article

As I stated before, please reference this information, as I could not find it in a quick literature source. KP Botany 16:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

The book in which this is referenced from is included as an additional reference in the article. The author was in direct contact with Maas and his wife, and I have also had contact and confirmed these facts. I have a copy of the Canna revision published by Maas. Will you stop this absurd vendeta!

Absurd vendeta? Referencing is part of Wikipedia articles, as it is probably part of the books and articles you are using. See Wikipedia:Citing sources. KP Botany 21:02, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Again and again, WHAT is the title of the revision of the genus. Include that information, if you don't know how to do a citation in another work, I will explain it, however, you're already told me you have the work which contains the revision of the genus. At this point I no longer believe that Maas revised the genus, since you can't seem to directly include this information, and it seems rather strange that you are so reluctant to do so. I don't know what's going on, but either he revised the genus in a proper publication of taxonomic literature, or he didn't. If he did, cite the source, either within the garden book, or directly, or simply name the source on the talk page and I will cite it, but don't keep citing a gardening guide as the revision of a genus. At this point, I think I have to check the gardening guide and other sources of yours. KP Botany 18:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)