Talk:Cylindropuntia imbricata

message: Some information from personal experience.  —JerryFriedman 17:23, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

message: The Good article nomination for  has failed
:At the moment the article is not structured very well, although the content is fine.   It looks very cluttered - there's not enough text to justify that many images, and the huge one on the left is definitely too large.  You should summarise the article's contents in a couple of paragraphs, then break the text up into, say, three sections - something like 'description' and 'range' to add to cultivation which you already have.  Worldtraveller 20:46, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Good articles|Good Article]] [[Wikipedia:Good articles/Nominations|nomination]] has failed 

message: :Still looks a little cluttered to me, with too many heavy headers for the length of the article. I'd cut out the first two headers, and just have their paragraphs free-standing, and reduce the cultivation to a ===header=== to remove the underline that splits the page across. I'd also replace the aboutgardenplants.com (too overly commercial) hardiness cite with another non-comm reference (I'll dig one out later). The distribution in Mexico also needs expanding to bring it to state level (as the US distrib already is); the info is at the USDA ARS GRIN page on the species. Also, note that Cylindropuntia is now generally treated as a distinct genus, not a subgenus of Opuntia (so the page will need to be moved). - MPF 09:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks!  As long as you notice that the previous reviewer thought it was too cluttered because it didn't have enough headers (and because a photo was too big).  —JerryFriedman 16:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Renominated

message: The reference I believe Kalmia was referring to was this one which states that Opuntia imbricata is a synonym for Cylindropuntia imbricata. I don't really have the expertise to comment on plant naming issues but there may be some merit in Kalmia's move. Please consider the issue thoughtfully. Cedars 00:32, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Naming

message: Members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles are in the process of doing a re-review of current Good Article listings to ensure compliance with the standards of the Good Article Criteria. (Discussion of the changes and re-review can be found here). A significant change to the GA criteria is the mandatory use of some sort of in-line citation (In accordance to WP:CITE) to be used in order for an article to pass the verification and reference criteria. Currently this article does not include in-line citations. It is recommended that the article's editors take a look at the inclusion of in-line citations as well as how the article stacks up against the rest of the Good Article criteria. GA reviewers will give you at least a week's time from the date of this notice to work on the in-line citations before doing a full re-review and deciding if the article still merits being considered a Good Article or would need to be de-listed. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact us on the Good Article project talk page or you may contact me personally. On behalf of the Good Articles Project, I want to thank you for all the time and effort that you have put into working on this article and improving the overall quality of the Wikipedia project. LuciferMorgan 02:23, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Re-Review and In-line citations 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Cylindropuntia imbricata. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061106165150/http://www.aboutgardenplants.com/Opuntia_imbricata.shtml to http://www.aboutgardenplants.com/Opuntia_imbricata.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130413145758/http://weeds.org.au/cgi-bin/weedident.cgi?tpl=plant.tpl&state=&s=&ibra=all&card=S52 to http://www.weeds.org.au/cgi-bin/weedident.cgi?tpl=plant.tpl&state=&s=&ibra=all&card=S52
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110815203802/http://etd.lib.ttu.edu/theses/available/etd-03252009-31295005979926/ to http://etd.lib.ttu.edu/theses/available/etd-03252009-31295005979926/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:29, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified