Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants/Collaboration

message: I've made a start on expanding this Top-priority article from a stub.  I've added a general overview of the scope of plant physiology, but the article still needs full sections on each of the major areas summarized in the "Scope" section I added.  If someone can add even one such section, it would help.
Also, the article has no images at all, and could benefit enormously from a few. --EncycloPetey 20:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A dramatic improvement in a short amount of time.  Thanks to EncycloPetey and everyone else who has helped out so far.  (I made a few minor cleanups, but that's all I found). Kingdon 15:54, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Plant physiology]] 

message: Currently this Top-priority article consists of a two sentence definition. --EncycloPetey 15:48, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: One of the first google hits was  which is notes for a lecture which might be a good outline, or at least starting point. Kingdon 16:23, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Photomorphogenesis]] 

message: The page has a lot of good information, but it is rather messy and needs revamping more than additions. I have suggested some edits on Talk:Pollen, I could do something to improve it after I've finished with Brassicaceae, but I'm not an expert. Aelwyn 19:30, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Pollen]] 

message: Deciduous - need to figure out the scope of this article (abscission and related processes? the ecology - kind of like hardwood forest but broader? And is the suggested merge with evergreen a good or bad idea?). (From Collaboration from page)
:The merger depends -- If this article is about the physiology and ecology of individual plants dropping their leaves, then a merger is a good idea.  If the article is about deciduous forest (which redirects there) then no, a merger would be inappropriate. --EncycloPetey 23:02, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A quick glance through "what links here" shows a lot of geographical articles (which seemed to have in mind deciduous forest or something pretty similar), a lot of specific plants (including many shrubs and vines), which are perhaps closer to the "physiology of individual plants", and at least one (Termite) which has in mind the meaning which now seems to have been moved to Deciduous (disambiguation)).  The #1 reason why we'd pick this article for collaboration is probably just that it is linked to from many articles (I don't even know how to get a count, but seems to be 1500+).  This made it hard for me to really evaluate all the links, in terms of which sort of article they'd most sensibly be linking to. At this point it is probably more worth worrying about whether to put this at the top of the list, than figuring out exactly what we'd do with it. Kingdon 00:35, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I propose to merge Deciduous and Evergreen, whilst Deciduous forest, which is another topic, deserves an article on its own. This would make things much easier. Aelwyn 23:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That sounds like a good way to organize. --EncycloPetey 03:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Deciduous]] 

message: Is there a place for listing plant-related articles that should exist but don't?  I just noticed that there's no article on betalains, the "beet-red" colors found in beets, cacti, carnivorous plants, and other Caryophyllidae. --EncycloPetey 03:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Note: I've gone ahead and created the betalain article (comments and copyedits welcome), but would still like to know whether there is a place to list plant articles that are needed. --EncycloPetey 06:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants/Article requests, but, as usual, not much used. You'd better cross-post a request both there and on in this page (possibly in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants) if you feel it is much more important than all of the articles listed there. It's like image ID request, if I wanted needed a quick answer on  this () image I wouldn't have put in Commons's Category:Unidentified_plants! Aelwyn 08:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's almost certainly a species of Asclepias, but I don't know which one. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:44, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oops, I forgot asking. It's almost certainly A. syriaca, the only plant of that genus growing here. Thanks anyway! Aelwyn (talk) 19:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

text: This is Asclepias fascicularis aka Narrowleaf milkweed. Beautiful photo that highlights this plant's tendency to grow within low canopy cover. 68.6.186.71 (talk) 15:09, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested articles 

message: I propose to merge Binary name into the article Botanical name.  While the former may eventually merit an article of its own, both articles have sat around with minimal content for well over a year now, and the content of Binary name nicely fits under the coverage of Botanical name.  
Please discuss at Talk:Botanical name#Merge Binary name here. --EncycloPetey 16:18, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger of two articles 

message: See :Wikipedia:The Core Contest.  There are details not specified yet (such as the start and end dates), but I see that the following Top-importance plant articles are all listed:
* Botany
* Flower
* Plant
This would be a nice time for a focused collaboration from our little community.  --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:42, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The closing date is Dec 9 at 23:59 UTC. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:40, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Core Improvement Contest