Talk:Cabbage tree (New Zealand)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Cabbage tree (New Zealand) is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to plants and botany. For more information, visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Why revert my edit regarding the Torbay palm? You will find that the most common name for this plant in the UK is Torbay palm, and very few have ever heard of the NZ cabbage tree. --Apathetic 09:40, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have reverted to your edit. It does appear to be known as the Torbay palm. Alan Liefting 09:36, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I've lived in Britain and been deeply interested in trees all my life, and had never heard of this usage before I saw it posted here. It most definitely isn't the commonest name (all the UK tree books call it Cabbage Tree), and most definitely isn't used throughout the UK. At best, it is a very local mis-naming by a small number of poorly educated people who don't know the difference between Agavaceae and Arecaceae. If it is going to be listed as a UK common name, then 'That Spiky Thing' should also be listed as a common name, it is used far more often. - MPF 10:24, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Renaming

This has been moved from 'Cabbage Tree' to 'Cabbage Tree (Cordyline australis)' to 'Cordyline australis' over the last year, and it seems to me that 'Cabbage Tree' is by far the most commonly used name and the correct title for the article. Opinions? Ziggurat 22:30, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Cabbage tree is a disambiguation page between three different plants commonly called this. It would not be appropriate to move the article to Cabbage Tree (currently a redirect to the dab page), or to appropriate the name entirely for this species. I think leaving it with the scientific name is fine.-gadfium 00:59, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, interesting. I see your point, and I certainly don't want to introduce a NZ-centric bias, but it seems that the current title of this article uses a highly uncommon and (to the general reader) unrecognisable name, and this is the only name that will appear in categories. It's a classic precision vs. common name conflict, so perhaps an alternative solution would be moving it to Cabbage Tree (New Zealand)? A quick check of ghits indicates 241,000 for "Cabbage Tree" Zealand and 63,800 for "Cordyline australis". Ziggurat 01:25, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with Cabbage Tree (New Zealand).-gadfium 01:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Generally, where there's any problem with the english name, the page is best placed at the scientific name, rather than a cumbersome bracketed title. Actually, there's a strong move to have all plants at scientific names, because so many common names have multiple uses, and so many species have multiple common names. I propose moving this page back to the scientific name - MPF 00:03, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't feel that the bracketing is cumbersome, but regardless in this instance it seems like a bad choice to have the scientific name only, when such a name would be unrecognisable to the general reader, especially with regards to things like the efficacity of categories. As much as I prefer the scientific outlook, it seems that using a specialist term is biasing the title towards scientific definitions over cultural and sociological ones, and that runs against Wikipedia aiming to be a general encyclopedia (similar to the points made here). Excuse me if I moved this too soon (no objections were raised in the last three days), but if it is moved back I think these points need to be addressed. Is there a relevant policy discussion or conclusion on this topic? Ziggurat 00:22, 30 March 2006 (UTC)