User talk:68.48.220.53

From Wikispecies
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I'm not sure it is entirely settled, see:

http://markmail.org/message/g4gbf65bguuojixk#query:Stewartia%20Stuartia+page:1+mid:ggmnp4hi7i6pczmf+state:results

Stho002 02:45, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, it is settled. "Stewartia" is the correct name; it is the original spelling of the genus and this spelling is accepted by a near-universal consensus of the modern botanical literature. I challenge you to find any modern botanical reference that uses "Stuartia".

OK, but I don't know why you are telling me all this! I have no opinion, and I am not involved. I was just helping to edit the changes when I saw someone having difficulty doing so. If you want to complete the job, go ahead. I have other priorities just now... Stho002 00:02, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

My apologies, you did some work on this genus and seemed to be correcting the article to the version so nicely written by Epibase. I won't continue it on your page and have copied the conversation to the village pump. My edits to the Wollemia nobilis article were similarly undone by MPF, who does not seem to accept the various vernacular names for the species--which quite ironically came straight from the Wollemia nobilis articles in several different language Wikipedias. "Wollemi pine" is certainly the vernacular name most widely used for this species in the USA.

Wollemia[edit]

Just because a name is widely used, does not make it accurate, or a wise idea. It is verifiable as you have stated, but it is not factual as you have also claimed. It is not Pinus nobilis, nor even in Pinaceae, but Wollemia nobilis, in the unrelated family Araucariaceae. To call it a pine is to promote error and confusion, and I do not believe we should be in the business of promoting error or confusion. Wollemia is (like the scientific names of many monotypic genera, such as Ginkgo, etc.) widely used as a common name as well as a scientific name; it is unambiguous, accurate, and completely avoids confusion over the identity and relationships of the plant. As such it is greatly preferable as a name. - MPF 08:04, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Just because the vernacular name does not satisfy you or your apparently rather rigid ideas about what a vernacular name should or should not be, does not make it appropriate for you to use Wikispecies to try to suppress a universally accepted vernacular name--one that is used as the official name for this species by, among others, the Australian government. The name is used by government entities, botanists, and conservation organizations. "Wollemia" may very well be a fine name but trying to impose the botanical name "Wollemia" in place of the vernacular name "Wollemi pine" rather misses the entire point of what vernacular names are, and how they differ from botanical names. (BTW "Ginkgo" does indeed have a perfectly acceptable vernacular name, "maidenhair tree". It is arguable whether somebody referring to "ginkgo" is employing a vernacular or botanical name.) 68.48.220.53 00:57, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

This is the discussion page for an anonymous user who has not created an account yet or who does not use it. We therefore have to use the numerical IP address to identify him/her. Such an IP address can be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user and feel that irrelevant comments have been directed at you, please create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users.