lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Alstroemeria psittacina

message: This name is a synonym of Alstroemeria pulchella. --Digigalos (talk) 18:58, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

message: The name Alstroemeria pulchella L.f. has widely been misapplied to this species. A. pulchella is a synonym of A. pelegrina, a species restricted to South America. Technical synonymy aside, as a search term, people looking for A. pulchella probably want information about A. psittacina. Plantdrew (talk) 23:14, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Quite a muddle. Perhaps merge the relevant content to Alstroemeria pulchella to either Alstroemeria psittacina (which most of the content seems to describe) and some to Alstroemeria pelegrina. Then redirect the page Alstroemeria pulchella to Alstroemeria pelegrina, putting a template:distinguish hatnote (or similar) on Alstroemeria pelegrina so that readers aren't misled, checking/correcting any links incoming to Alstroemeria pulchella. Might that work? Klbrain (talk) 13:58, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the sources specifically was about A. psittacina, the synonymy & distrib. came from the entry on that taxon, so I moved it there. Your suggestion for redirect protocol sounds perfect to me.  Leo Breman (talk) 12:56, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Redirect in; I haven't moved the additional material over from Alstroemeria pulchella, as I can't be sure as to which plant it describes. Klbrain (talk) 16:28, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

text: There are too many Alstroemeria pulchellas, so I created a disambiguation page at that name and put sources on the talk page.  —  AjaxSmack  04:16, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge
Talk:Xanthorrhoea australis

message: I've updated this page primarily to fix a broken link (ASGAP apparently no longer exists), and while I was there compared the ANPSA page to the current content. It's fairly clear that X. australis does not need bushfires to flower, so I've updated it.
If my changes look too close for comfort to the ANPSA page, feel free to update them.  Groogle (talk) 01:46, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Bushfires?
Talk:Hill City, Minnesota

message: If reliable sources can be found, should it be mentioned that Hill City was hit by a large tornado on August 29, 2013? NintendoTTTEfan2005 (talk) 09:01, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  2013 tornado
Talk:Agave maculata

message: Hey, all:
I hope this addition does not interfere with the existing format of the above.  You can color me "Noob" since I am very new to this process.  
I added info on M. maculosa and also S. maculosus and would like to add a couple of photos to the entry.  With due respect to the previous contributors, the photos here now present a very different image compared to reality.  I see that one of them is from Nevada, which probably is outside the native range of the plant in any case.   The photos I have are of plants in their native range and in typical growth habit.  I have not been able to figure out how to upload photos and would like some more assistance.  I only just found out how to end these "talk" items with my username and time stamp.  Thanks!
David Bluestem 15:08, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Template talk:WikiProject Higher education

message: I just redirected Template:University to this page. It should make it a lot easier for people to tag pages because it is the first thing that comes to mind. I hope this will not be a problem. Please comment here if you have any concerns.06:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: Is it more useful if we change the template so that it says X article "is a current "Collaboration of the Fortnight" rather than "was a previous Collaboration of the Fortnight"? How is this tag useful? I'm just curious as to how people use it. —Noetic Sage 21:25, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  COTF 

message: If you notice on pages like Talk:Harvard University and Talk:Vanderbilt University, a space is found after our nested template. I'm convinced it's something to do with the code of our template. Any suggestions for a fix? —Noetic Sage 21:53, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Space? 

message: This template can now be used by typing  and adding parameters appropriately. Hope this shortcut helps!—Noetic Sage 22:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirect

message: Hi-Would someone be able to fix the formatting error for the hook? Thanks again --Funandtrvl (talk) 23:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you mean the HOOK_COLLAPSED? If so,  — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting error for hook? 

message: If someone would enable the FM class, that would be appreciated.  :Category:FM-Class Universities articles has already been created, and  and  have already been appropriately tagged. NYCRuss ☎ 14:34, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Seconding the request above Aloneinthewild (talk) 16:22, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template. Well, I would action this, but after what happened at Template talk:WikiProject Songs#Edit request on 13 April 2013 I am very reluctant. Has the WikiProject given full consent? Am I expected to clean up the mess that will inevitably follow? If not, who will? --Redrose64 (talk) 18:08, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  FM class 

message: You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education § Linking WP:UNIGUIDE from our talk banner?.   talk 07:48, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion at [[:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education#Linking WP:UNIGUIDE from our talk banner?|Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Higher education §&nbsp;Linking WP:UNIGUIDE from our talk banner?]]
Talk:Chlorophytum

message: The reference to aphrodisiac properties needs more scholarly attention (the literature in the area appears to populated by only one or two authors, who seem to be interested parties). Also some warning about the potential dangers of saponins is needed.
Gwr-squirrel (talk) 18:22, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: May 2009

message: This genus has been assigned to various families:
Anthericaceae (Flora of Zimbabwe), which seems now to be considered a synonym of Asparagaceae (GRIN) in which this genus is placed in the subfamily Agavoideae.
Hermeswiki (talk) 11:42, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: March 2010
Talk:Agave victoriae-reginae

message: And what's it called if it's teacup size with sharp marginal teeth and a different varigation pattern?? Same? <BR> --2602:306:CFCE:1EE0:61BB:861D:7944:9C17 (talk) 07:05, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  With marginal teeth?
Talk:Ornithogalum

message: These are difficult to get rid of... Roundup doesn't phase them.   O_O —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.91.128.54 (talk) 03:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Random comment... 
Talk:Hyacinthoides hispanica

message: The bluebells in the picture for this article don't look very much like hispanica. the flowers are all pendant and are not particularly wide-mouthed. They clearly aren't non-scripta either. They are surely the hybrid between the two × massartiana. Pure hispanica is very rare in the UK, a picture to be used here should be of plants from its native range - these are from a botanical garden in Vienna. The Yowser (talk) 14:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree entirely; the picture is clearly not H. hispanica, and is probably the hybrid. I have replaced it by one from Commons which looks right to me, although the details of where it was photographed aren't given. I have slides of the true species photographed in Andalucia; I'll try scanning them to see if one would be better given that it has known provenance – unless anyone else can find such a photo? Peter coxhead (talk) 15:25, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Quick move Peter, well done! The flowers in the photo you found are much more patent and the 'bells' are more open. The stigmas appear blue too, but aren't very visible. It's also more gracile and doesn't seem to have the vigorous habit of the hybrid. Now I can take off my scholarly robes and return to the Yowser's natural habits... The Yowser (talk) 14:27, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Not Spanish Bluebells
Talk:Hyacinthus orientalis

message: In this article there is a misconception
The flower 'Hyakinthos'  of Nicander and Lucian and other ancient writters is probably the plant Gladiolus segetum (Gennadios - Plant Dictionary, 1914).
G. segetum is considered until nowadays as a funereal plant as hyakinth was considered too during the ancient times. 
Vardos (talk) 00:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Real Hyacinthus 
Talk:Muscari

message: Muscari comosum is eaten often in Italy and it's good, not toxic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.43.197.119 (talk) 22:17, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

message: Muscari, Leopoldia and Pseudomuscari are now treated as separate genera by recent reliable sources (e.g. Kew, APweb), whereas they were combined here. I've now changed the redirects for "Leopoldia" and "Pseudomuscari" into articles, and moved relevant material from here into those articles. Peter coxhead (talk) 22:35, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split 
Talk:Scilla peruviana

message: This is not exactly a well-known plant, except among bulb enthusiasts, who are used to scientific names. Hence I can't see why it should not be at the scientific name, Scilla peruviana. (And anyway, it should be at "Portuguese squill", not "Portuguese Squill".) Peter coxhead (talk) 07:20, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree, but I can't make the move myself. I've been on a Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants assessment kick today, but have been noting the articles I've visited that might be best moved to scientific names. User:Rkitko indicated that he was willing to consider executing some moves for me. I'll suggest the move to him shortly, if he doesn't see the comments here. Plantdrew (talk) 08:13, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Happy to make any moves you may have picked out as easily uncontroversial, like this one. And this notification function is great for things like this! Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 13:35, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Article title

message: I have looked at Linnaeus' description of Scilla peruviana in the Species Plantarum (Linnaeus, 1753) and under type locality it clearly states "Lusitania" i.e. Portugal. Therefore, he did know the species did not come from Peru. On top of that, the paragraph stating that he thought it was from Peru is unreferenced. I think it should be removed on this basis Elspooky (talk) 12:08, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There are reliable sources which state that the name is because the plant was originally thought to have come from Peru, but not that Linnaeus thought this. Linnaeus's peruviana is based on the name given earlier by Clusius, Hyacinthus stellatus peruanus. There's a story that Clusius misunderstood a statement that the bulbs came from a ship called "Peru" to mean that the bulbs came from the country of Peru. Peter coxhead (talk) 19:33, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming
Talk:Ornithogalum umbellatum

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect "Common star of Bethlehem". Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Plantdrew (talk) 03:43, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  ""Common star of Bethlehem"" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Scientology cross

message: I think thats a pic of Aleister Crowley's cross and not of the Rosicrucians. refer to the image here 124.82.0.221 01:53, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rosy Cross 

message: Isn't this article completely useless now that (along with many other symbols) the Scientology cross image has been deleted? AndroidCat (talk) 05:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to agree - without the image, it's entirely pointless. I don't see why an image of the Scientology cross couldn't be justified as fair use on this page; but if it can't, there's really no point having the page at all. Terraxos (talk) 16:28, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's delete this article.S. M. Sullivan (talk) 08:06, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, the article is unnecessary with the article Symbols of Scientology. Personal thoughts that filling wikipedia with articles about Scientology being silly aside. This article isn't necessary with another article covering it well enough, along with many others. This should be deleted.--Kahn Iceay 21:20, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll have a go at expanding this article over the next few days. We'll see then if it's suitable for merging back. I suspect not, since it would take up a disproportionate amount of space in its ostensible parent article. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:29, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Usefulness
Talk:Gladiolus

message: This deserves a stub of its own but doesn't belong in this article, which is about the plant. Any takers? Rivertorch (talk) 03:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems like we need a "For other uses, see Gladiolus (Anatomy)" at the top.  Skiendog (talk) 23:37, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anatomy section 

message: List of brachiopod genera links to anomalesia, could someone disambiguate? Paradoctor (talk) 18:58, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brachiopod genus of the same name 

message: This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Diannaa (talk) 23:06, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible copyright problem 
Talk:Free Expression Tunnel

message: I replaced the photo with one of my own. The old photo showed the tunnel after it had been painted Carolina Blue, and we just can't have that.
The Duct Tape Avenger 22:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Crocosmia

message: I revised the passage about common names. In 40 years of gardening in the Pacific Northwest USA I have never encountered the names "Coppertips" nor "Falling Stars" to describe crocosmia / montbretia, in books, nurseries, nor conversations.  The authoritative book Sunset Western Garden Book cross-references "Montbretia" as "See Crocosmia" and makes no mention of the other names (and I have multiple editions going back almost 50 years -- this has been consistent). I admit confusion between montbretia and crocosmia, prefer to use montbretia for the invasive C. × crocosmiiflora.  This appears to be the case in other references I have, though I'm not going to review all my many books at this time.
I will give benefit of the doubt that somewhere coppertips and falling stars are used, although there would be no objection from me if these names were omitted.  But the blanket comment about common usage in the USA must be omitted.  GeeBee60 (talk) 15:43, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I have been a little bolder. I can find no reference to these names in any plant database, nor in the various British sources including the RHS. I have therefore removed these unsourced names - leaving it up to anybody to provide properly sourced alternative names (other than montbretia which is of course still in use).Darorcilmir (talk) 16:41, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. My curiosity getting the better of me, a revision history search finds that these statements have stood unchallenged since 2005. We read about what we don't know, skip what we do. The editor who initially inserted the common names (Dec 2004) and the one who placed the geographic use as the United States (Nov 2005) both live in Europe. Sigh.  GeeBee60 (talk) 15:58, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Naming

message: I feel that a citation is NOT needed that describes how a corm grows, and the request is deleted. For gardeners this is almost "common knowledge".  The attached photo is a wikimedia image.
As a gardener I can confirm that C. × crocosmiiflora is invasive in my region, but this assertion does merit further research that is authoritative.  So far I have found a Nature Conservancy listing and this one: https://www.invasive.org/species/list.cfm?id=64.  Thus, this {citation needed} I have kept.
GeeBee60 (talk) 15:45, 7 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations needed (and not) 

message: Would it be acceptable for me to add an additional photo to the gallery of crocosmia in bloom? Thank you! MylarLemon (talk)  — Preceding undated comment added 02:58, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional Photo?
Talk:Orris root

message: Also used in making clove apples.  The Workbasket, Number 1, Volume 25 - October, 1959, 25th Year Anniversary Issue. Rklawton (talk) 00:59, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

message: I was checking this article out because I have heard that some of the aromatic chemicals in orris root can be toxic as inhalants and lethal if taken internally.  I think you need to list the aromatics and go into their uses, both as fixatives, scents and in cooking, detailing the dangers.
Just because something has been eaten for centuries doesn't automatically make it safe.  The amount that's safe to use in whatever application is significant.
I realize this is a stub, but I think that its limited coverage might lead some folks to assume it is safe to use, across the board, which is not the case.
Needs to be expanded or at least given some kind of caveat to prevent problems.  Zlama (talk) 00:51, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some essential info missing 

message: in the 'In perfume' section: 
 
"Orris Noir" contains regular orris root oil, not the oil of Iris nigricans, which is an endangered species." 
 
WHY does this sentence appear (and why) here? 
 
The overview section clearly mentions only two different species and in the perfume chapter it feels totally misplaced after the rest of the section being solely a list of (brand) names. 
 
So why would anyone THINK that one of those perfumes uses THIS species? Is it a regional/ local thing, do people from its local natural habitat have that idea, was it used in former times/ is it used traditionally, in a small, non-industrial scale for similar purposes, or is this one perfume marketed especially to that species' home region, so that buyers there get wrong ideas; (or) was there a public debate about it (and why only mention THIS species and not any of the other wild, not much cultivated, possibly rare, ones)? 
 
It can totally be relevant information, but the text should, for people unfamiliar with a possible/y regional debate give some reason as to why it is relevant, like e.g. such debate having happened somewhere (and it should be reconsidered where in the article it should be mentioned or if the 'In perfume' section should be written differently/ more clearly be more than a list). 
 
Possibly there are several or even many wild irises potentially usable and possibly formerly used, possibly mentioned in historic, (out)dated books describing such use for them, so that a whole chapter about (nature) conservation concerns and non-advisable-for-industrial-use wild species might be an idea?  
 
2A02:3033:402:FC54:1:0:581A:C5FE (talk) 05:30, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  WHY is this sentence here? 

message: What about ionone(s)? 
 
This is the aroma component mentioned in the German article ('Schwertlilien#Verwendung'; one of the last sentences of the chapter and not in a list of components but just in the text); is this false or is it missing here? 2A02:3033:402:FC54:1:0:581A:C5FE (talk) 06:11, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constituent chemicals
Talk:Iris versicolor

message: Is this flower toxic?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Netobsessive (talk • contribs) 13:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Like many other irises, most parts of the plant are poisonous (rhizome and leaves), if mistakenly ingested can cause stomach pains and vomiting. Also handling the plant may cause a skin irritation or an allergic reaction.DavidAnstiss (talk) 16:44, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Talk:Comforter

message: Added information regarding comforter packaging Aignam 14:51, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This doesn't fit in with several other comments that say that Duvets are thicker and much warmer than comforters or other bedding. If that is the case, then a Duvet would not be used year round. 07:20, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Misc. corrections

message: Article needs to be more international in its application of "comforter". Aussies tend to inherit british meanings and afaik, "comforter" means a well-padded bed topper (doesn't reach the floor e.g.) for extra warmth over sheets and blankets. Looks like some areas of the US see it that way too, so it's regional. Like a quilt, it doesn't have another cover over it, but is stitched into one thing & goes on top of everything else. It's usually more plump than a quilt, so in all, it's different. Mac dictionary calls it a thicker quilt and doesn't have "doona" - unfortunately. Wiki has Duvet article & dictionary says it's filled with down or feathers or synthetic substitutes & used without blankets & doona is an australianism. So fyi, there ya go. Manytexts (talk) 02:25, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In the UK (back in the 50s & 60s) an eiderdown was basically a comforter as described in this article (although it's presumably a derivative of the duvet, with its eider down filling) used on top of sheets and blankets, but you almost never come across them now as we all have duvets. Mikenorton (talk) 07:51, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Less American, more international?
Talk:Crocus vernus

message: kako nemate cvetnu formulu fam. iridaceae botovi jedni :Pp  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.46.251.26 (talk) 14:01, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

message: Crocus vernus is a species complex, including Crocus vernus sensu strictu, Crocus siculus, Crocus neapolitanus, Crocus neglectus, Crocus heufelianus, Crocus discolor and Crocus vittatus, and possibly more species. Lavateraguy (talk) 10:57, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Species complex 

message: The section Taxonomy states: "The Latin specific epithet vernus refers to both 'vernal' (spring) and 'crocus' ",[1] citing Dr. Peter Jarvis, . The statement can indeed be found there. The problem is that this is the sole source where it can be found. No Latin dictionary lists any other sense for vernus than that of an adjective, meaning belonging to spring. So it appears that Dr. Jarvis made a mistake, which we should not repeat in our encyclopedia. (The Latin name for the Crocus sativus was crocus or crocum, which most dictionaries gloss as crocus, not distinguishing between spring and autumn.)  --Lambiam 12:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of Latin ''vernus''.
Talk:Dietes iridioides

message: I'm not sure the included image is actually Dietes iridoides, by Goldblatt's key here it seems to key out to D. grandiflora to me - "inner tepals with brown markings on the claw" vs "inner tepals not marked". This distinction is actually mentioned in this article (!) Apparently they are frequently confused within the garden trade.
:Good catch. Image replaced. Plantdrew (talk) 15:02, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Dubious