Talk:Pinus contorta

message: Various version of the caption formatting for :Image:Pinus_contorta_map.png and :Commons:Image:Pinus contorta map.png are given below. (The displayed versions have sizepx, left and right deleted from the image format.) I think all are acceptable except Revision as of 23:07, 26 September 2005. It does not format properly on some browsers. The line breaks occur after the each color name. The last one may be objectionable on browsers that do not display colored text properly, but otherwise is the one I prefer because the reader can match the colors of the caption to those on the map directly without having to translate the word blue to the color blue. Additionally, I think it fine to include subsp. in each line. I didn't because I think it is unnecessarily verbose for a caption where brevity is a virtue and because the text color sets off the subspecies name from the species name.
:Nice idea on the colour captions; the word "subsp." should however be included as indication of rank is required in plant infraspecific taxa (ICBN Article 24). The captions have however made me realise I did the map badly in the first place, as red-green colourblind people will have trouble seeing the map; maybe I'd better re-do it in new colours - any suggestions for better colours? - MPF 21:00, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I took advantage of a feature of my graphics editor that I've wanted to try. :Commons:Image:Pinus contorta map.png has been modified with different textures as well as colors to distinguish the regions. Please revert this experiment once you've had a chance to see it; I'm not that pleased with it, but it might help the discussion. -Walter Siegmund 23:20, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: This morning, I had coffee with a friend with red-green (deuteranomaly?) color blindness, the most common form of color blindness. I was able to try different color schemes for :Commons:Image:Pinus contorta map.png with him. The one I uploaded, i.e., the current version, is the one that was easiest for him to distinguish. He said that the textures that I tried in the previous version were not very helpful. The rule seems to be to use only one color in the red/yellow/green range since these look similar to someone with deuteranomaly and similar conditions. Shades between green and dark blue are perceived normally so the remaining colors should be chosen from that pallet, despite it being very restrictive. He can easily distinguish between the cyan and blue (of the new map). Finally, ensure that the text suffices to convey the information even if the colors do not. I think that the article, as written does that. The color blindness article has links to graphics design web sites with much more information. Walter Siegmund 23:31, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll have a look at the color blindness talk page sometime soon; I find the cyan a bit glaring (and hard to read the cyan text), but that's a small price to pay for clarity for all.  - MPF 22:37, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with your comments about the colorblind version. We could have both versions and put the colorblind version in a thumbnail. -Walter Siegmund 00:33, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Images, formatting

message: Hi.  I'm hoping one of you tree expert-types can help me identify the species in this picture http://www.cayoosh.net/pix/cleven/bridgecanyon99.jpg  - not sure if it's a Ponderosa or Lodgepole or maybe something else.  The area this is from has a lot of such snag-type pines - I was looking for another picture or two from other locations, and maybe one with a closeup of the needles; I know I don't have a closeup of the bark for sure.  The location is on the inland side of the Coast Mountains in British Columbia, about 20 mi W of Lillooet, British Columbia, which is in Ponderosa Pine range as well as Lodgepole.Skookum1 21:40, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't tell. The foliage and bark do not look like Ponderosa Pine to me. You've ruled out Douglas Fir? That probably would have been my first guess. Walter Siegmund (talk) 23:35, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

text: Looks like douglas-fir.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.5.74.146 (talk) 23:51, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Help identifying pine species

message: I edited this to change the sort order on the page for the :Category:Pinus.  It had been set to alphabetize under Pine.  That might make sense for categories where there are a lot of trees and a few of them are pines; then all the pines group together.  But on the page where everything is a pine, it made more sense to alphabetize under Lodgepole.   140.147.236.194 (talk) 16:18, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit to improve sort order in Category Pinus 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Whitebark Pine which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 03:29, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: A suggestion by Prax (a horticultural expert) leads to the Rocinante, on The Expanse (TV series), being renamed after this. ELSchissel (talk) 19:02, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uses in popular culture section? 

message: The text is a bit garbled, sometimes using 'lodgepole' and 'shore' interchangeably, and other times using those names to (apparently) distinguish the coastal variety from the interior variety. This needs clarification, as the average reader is just going to be confused. also, you can't say, as the text does, that varieties of the same species 'hybridize' - surely that can only be applied to different species (as mentioned regarding Jack Pine). I think the word you want is 'mingle' or 'interbreed'. 2A01:CB1D:2E:3500:11DE:2DC4:5B20:2CC0 (talk) 10:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarify the subspecies