Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants

Main page

Talk

Taxon template

Botanist template

Resources

Events

Requests

New articles

Index

WikiProject Plants was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 17 December 2007.

	This project page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Plants This page is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant

Archives since 2011

54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 30 days are automatically archived 2 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 7.

Please comment at Talk:Olea oleaster#Articles are a mess concerning two articles I regard as a mess: Olive and Olea oleaster. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:30, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Acer rubrum has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:00, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious, does anyone want to help me co-nominate an article for FAC? I haven't confirmed which article I want to work on, but I'm thinking either Ascarina lucida or Pectinopitys ferruginea. Alexeyevitch(talk) 11:00, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Pectinopitys ferruginea article looks the better of the two at the moment. The Ascarina lucida page has some issues, most conspicuously in poor grammar; the English possessive -'s should never be used with Latin scientific names ("lucida's" 🤢🤮); the multiple instances of this need eliminating. - MPF (talk) 12:11, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] This seems like a stylistic choice to me (rather than a grammatical rule). Once a Latin binomial is used in an English sentence, it functions as an English noun phrase, not as Latin. English grammar allows -'s on any noun phrase that behaves syntactically as a noun, regardless of its origin. Do you have a source or style guide that claims otherwise? Esculenta (talk) 14:32, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Esculenta no, I haven't seen any such; but neither have I ever seen a style guide that specifies "do not print the first letter of each word in pink ink". It's so blindingly obvious, that it shouldn't, and doesn't, need saying. Find me one botanical, or zoological, textbook, or research article, that accepts it as a style. I've never seen it done in any published work. - MPF (talk) 20:36, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Sure, here's six relatively recent journal article titles:

• journal Taxon: "Arabidopsis thaliana's Wild Relatives: An Updated Overview on Systematics, Taxonomy and Evolution" JSTOR 27756719
• journal Nature Communications: "Genome-wide association study of Arabidopsis thaliana's leaf microbial community" PMID 25382143
• journal: Nature Communications: "Extensive local adaptation within the chemosensory system following Drosophila melanogaster's global expansion" PMID 27292132
• journal PNAS: "Dispensability of Escherichia coli's latent pathways" PMID 21300895
• journal: PLOS Computational Biology: "Genome-Scale Reconstruction of Escherichia coli's Transcriptional and Translational Machinery: A Knowledge Base, Its Mathematical Formulation, and Its Functional Characterization" doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000312 }: unflagged free DOI (link)
• journal: Journal of Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology: "Characterizing Escherichia coli's transcriptional response to different styrene exposure modes reveals novel toxicity and tolerance insights" doi:10.1093/jimb/kuab019

I suppose they haven't read the MPF style guide. Esculenta (talk) 21:18, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] I've rephrased stuff on Wikipedia to get rid of possessives with scientific names, but that was because I didn't know how to get italics to work properly when there was an apostrophe; I just now learned there was a template for that being used in the Ascarina lucida article. Plantdrew (talk) Plantdrew (talk) 21:40, 14 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] I have no clue if there should or shouldn't be possessives next to taxonomic names, but you can use {{apostrophe}} to add apostrophes adjacent to italicized or bolded words: ''The Big Old Book of Facts''{{apostrophe}}s produces "The Big Old Book of Facts's". I've used it when discussing books or in DYKs. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:39, 14 January 2026 (UTC) Oops, realized I misread that and that you were just made aware of this template. Oh, well... ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:41, 14 January 2026 (UTC) [reply] Responding to MPF's initial comment. I'm curious, what are the other current issues with the Ascarina lucida article? It is mainly a South Island plant, where I live, and I'd like it to reach a high status if I commit to working on it. Pectinopitys ferrugenia would require more sourcing as it is a more well-known and studied plant, although I'm willing to work thru it. Alexeyevitch(talk) 08:07, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Alexeyevitch Mainly cleanup edits needed and reducing some wordiness; Lavateraguy has already dealt with some of it; I'll have a go through and and pick out some more. One other I saw was that it has two varieties, but the link says 'subspecies' (not the same!). There is also nothing on uses; are there any recorded Māori uses for it? Is the fruit edible? Any traditional medicinal uses? Potential toxicity? I'd also been going to say it needs a paragraph about use in cultivation outside NZ, but I can't find anything; as far as I can see, it hasn't even been introduced into Britain (very surprisingly for a South Island native, which should be hardy in milder parts of Britain), let alone become widespread as a garden shrub like e.g. Griselinia littoralis or Cordyline australis have. - MPF (talk) 10:27, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] @Alexeyevitch done now. Also noticed needs adding, the difference(s) between the two varieties; unfortunately I don't have access to the 1961 Flora of New Zealand where the varietal combination is made (if you do have access, it's on page 173). - MPF (talk) 11:36, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply] Thanks, MPF. Māori were actually not really attracted to Ascarina lucida unlike Pectinopitys ferrugenia (for example, lol). It's a very rare plant in the North Island, and is really only common in the South Island's West Coast Region. I'm not aware of any toxicity or recorded uses by European settlers. Research published recently has made sourcing easy for the Ascarina lucida article, which might entice me to push it to FAC. On the other hand, Pectinopitys ferrugenia is a more valuable tree, which (again) might entice me to push it to FAC. I'll also inform the NZ community about the articles' possible expansion. Either way, thanks for the cleanup on the page. Alexeyevitch(talk) 12:43, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Marsileaceae has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 17:40, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Linnaeus has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 17:45, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cactus has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 04:26, 28 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've begun a peer review for Aquilegia with the hopes of taking this article to FAC once the review is completed. Comments are encouraged! Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 04:20, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life#Inclusion criteria for List of organisms of Place about what should be included in such lists. Please contribute there. Thank you. SchreiberBike | ⌨  03:45, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]