Jump to content

Talk:Liquidambar orientalis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oriental Sweetgum

[edit]

Hi! Thanks for your note. As I noted in the edit summary, that move was because of the flora naming convention, which says:

Scientific names are to be used as page titles in all cases except the following, as determined on a case-by-case basis through discussion on the WikiProject Plants talk page:
  1. Agricultural and horticultural cases in which multiple different products stem from the same scientific name (eg. brussel sprouts, cabbage & broccoli). In such a case, a separate page with the botanical description of the entire species is preferred (eg. Brassica oleracea).
  2. Plants which are economically or culturally significant enough to merit their own page, using the common name as a title, describing their use. Example: Coffee. (A) separate page(s) with the botanical description(s) of the taxa involved, using the scientific name, is preferred.

American Sweetgum may be another candidate to be moved. It may meet the exception because of its use as an ornamental plant, but my initial decision would be to move it. Other quasi-popular ornamentals have been moved to their scientific names. The naming convention is relatively new, and we haven't made an effort to move all the pages that already exist in violation of it. What are your thoughts on moving American Sweetgum to the scientific name? Cheers --Rkitko (talk) 15:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would say that, for the naming conventions, it makes more sense to treat all the species in the genus together. I can not venture an opinion on American Sweetgum because I do not how significant the tree is, economically or culturally. Especially in the viewpoint of the people who share the same habitat as the tree of course. Regards. Cretanforever 17:07, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
True, consistency is a good goal, but some species in select genera will never be moved because they are too significant at the common name. The naming convention came about because of disagreements over which common name is most common, but some common names are so widely accepted it makes no difference if it's at the scientific name or not. Specifically, some of the hardwood trees used for furniture or other wood products are too culturally significant to move. Ultimately, I don't see much of a difference in the article title as long as there are redirects from all common names.
For consistency in each genus, we'd need someone with admin powers to move articles over redirects with more than one edit, which I often encounter. That's probably another reason the naming convention hasn't been widely implemented. Though most WP:PLANTS editors have been moving pages according to the convention when they encounter them. I found this one when I was scrolling through the bot-generated new article list for WP:PLANTS. (Nice job, by the way! It's always nice to come upon an article on that list that has the right italics, wikimarkup, taxobox, image, and a nice start-sized entry. If you ever find yourself getting too bored with your current endeavor, feel free to browse through Category:Plant articles needing taxoboxes or Category:Plant articles needing photos. That will keep us all busy for weeks!) Cheers, --Rkitko (talk) 06:00, 19 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the moment, the name "Liquidambar orientalis" has 900-odd English language entries, "Oriental Sweetgum" 114, and and "Turkish Sweetgum" 6 entries, including a very authoritative one. Let me just hope that the last one will somehow be hauled up in time. Cretanforever 03:49, 20 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Liquidambar orientalis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:36, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Liquidambar orientalis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:19, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liquidambar orientalis. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:15, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Liquidambar_orientalis&oldid=1203613962"