Talk:Illicium anisatum

See the following

http://www.henriettesherbal.com/eclectic/journals/ajp1881/08-illicium.html --222.67.205.85 (talk) 08:50, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I'm not sure if the following article is a valid one, as it can not be retrieved from the webiste indicated by Economic Botany

http://www.jstor.org/pss/4255854 --222.67.205.85 (talk) 09:42, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 6 December 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) JJP_{Mas_ter} (she/they) 05:12, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Illicium anisatum → Japanese star anise – WP:COMMONNAME. Ngrams. See Talk:Illicium verum#Requested move 18 November 2024. Theparties (talk) 04:59, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose WP:COMMONNAME is not the issue; a case must be made based on WP:NCFLORA. I see no reason to move this article based on NCFLORA. Peter coxhead (talk) 14:26, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The Ngrams graph is thoroughly unconvincing. It shows that the scientific name has been far more prevalent historically and as of 2022 is once again more common. An argument could be made under NCFLORA that this plant has a "cultural role or use that makes it more prominent in some other field than in botany" and should therefore be under a vernacular name, but again, it does not seem that "Japanese star anise" is the COMMONNAME here. Toadspike [Talk] 15:57, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.