lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Opuntia humifusa

message: I added a photo that I took in Ottawa, Illinois last summer. It's the first image I have added to wikipedia, so I hope that it's appropriate.--Thecoldmidwest (talk) 17:59, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your contributions.  It is a bit hard to lay out images on the page when there is as little text as there is here, but that isn't a particularly big deal.  You can find a lot more at places like Wikipedia:Images#Image choice and placement.  As for the image itself, are you sure "shade" is really an accurate caption?  It looks to me like that location would be classified at least as part shade, and perhaps even sunny (if it gets direct sun for much of the day, that is). Kingdon (talk) 12:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

text: You are correct and thank you. --Thecoldmidwest (talk) 19:30, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: A note

message: The beginning of the page on Eastern prickly pear says 
"Eastern Prickly Pear (Opuntia humifusa), also known as Indian fig, is a native cactus found in the northeastern part of North America and is found through New Jersey, New York and the New England states, and even in parts of Eastern Canada, e.g. southern Ontario."
As is obvious from the paragraph above, the plant is native to not India but a continent across the world, and as such - since wikipedia is not limited to users in US - it might be better to insert a correction or explanation that the word Indian here has nothing whatsoever to do with India or anthing of India, but rather the misunderstanding occurring on discovery of a different continent four centuries or so ago.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by DrJGMD (talk • contribs) 13:32, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Any lengthy explanation isn't called for, since the usage of the word "Indian" is quite peripheral to this article.  We might link Indian to Native Americans in the United States or Indigenous peoples of the Americas. Personally, I've not heard the term Indian fig applied to this cactus, but it seems to be widespread enough that we probably shouldn't just omit it (I base that on some google searches, although a more thorough look at reliable sources would provide a better answer). Kingdon (talk) 21:52, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Indian fig 

message: — Assignment last updated by HydrangeaLove (talk) 18:34, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Organismal Diversity B
Talk:Lophophora

message: it says in the article that the mescaline content in dried peyote can reach 7%. but isn't that in fact the total alkaloid content?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.113.82.240 (talk) 20:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  mescaline content 

message: Note a discrepancy in this sentence under the section Species, L. diffusa: "Several people have reported that this cactus is psychoactive if ingested, though the experience is not unlike peyote."
Based on anecdotal reports, and because pellotine is described as having a qualitatively different effect than mescaline, I am pretty sure the sentence should instead read, "Several people have reported that this cactus is psychoactive if ingested, though the experience is unlike peyote." (note the change from "not unlike" to "unlike").
"Pellotine was manufactured and sold as a sleeping aid by Boeringer and Sons in Germany and tested as a hypnotic on a total of several hundred patients in Europe (Jolly, 1896, 1896a; Pilcz, 1896) and the United States (Hutchings, 1897).
However, the later discovery and marketing by the Bayer Company of a series of inexpensive synthetic barbiturates like Veronal (barbital) in 1904, and Luminal (phenobarbital) in 1911, two of pharmacology's all time blockbuster drugs, made the costly and tedious isolation of
pellotine from Lophophora williamsii impractical."http://www.heffter.org/docs/hrireview/02/chap2.pdf
A sedative or barbiturate does not characterize mescaline, according to most bio-assay reports I have read (or my first-hand experience, for that matter). Therefore, I'm going to change the wording of that particular sentence accordingly.giggle 01:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Since most of the content of this article is unsourced, changing one way or the other doesn't affect its lack of reliability. If referencing isn't provided, much of the content needs to be deleted. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Species - differences in psychoactivity 

message: : Since most of the content of this article is unsourced, changing one way or the other doesn't affect its lack of reliability. If referencing isn't provided, much of the content needs to be deleted. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: I've never heard or seen of a spiny one until now. I bought one in a London shop a few days ago because it was definitely a peyote of some sort (not sure if Williamsii or Diffusa; colour of D. but flattened like W., but I'm not expert) and it has some sparse but definite thornage. Lightly curved, quite thin, about 3/4 inch long, not strongly attached. Zero to two to a tuft. I've never seen anything like it. I can probably sort out a pic if anyone's interested.
I presumed Lophophora had lost the genetics to grow thorns but perhaps not.
Thoughts please?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.29.238.127 (talk) 19:09, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lophophora are always spineless?
Talk:Graphium sarpedon

message: This page is a great start but I believe can be improved on. It contains a well written description section but the rest of the sections are lacking in substance and could be added to. For example, the behavior section mentions that the butterfly migrates but does not speak to where and when it migrates and any reasoning behind this behavior at all. The outline could also benefit from sections about predators and defense mechanisms which I believe are vital in understanding an organism’s behavior. One line that also caught my eye is in the behavior section where it says, “Occasionally, as many as eight will be seen at the same puddle.” I feel like the number eight is an arbitrary statement and is not really rooted in any fact. As there was no citation reference next to this sentence I cannot be sure that eight is the greatest number of butterflies that will feed at the same puddle. 
Richywutang2018 (talk) 05:03, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions For Improvement
Talk:Rebutia

message: The limits of the genus are currently very unclear, as is the number of species; both vary widely from source to source. This makes it difficult to write about clearly. I have restructured the article to conform more closely to Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants/Template and make it a bit easier to follow. A Description section is still needed. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:30, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Attempt to clarify content
Talk:Pereskia

message: Would be nice to know which animals (living and extinct) feed on the fruits and leaves of these plants. Breadteam (talk) 06:23, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

message: I've updated much of the article to take into account the split into three genera, but the Description section remains unchanged right now. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:50, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description
Talk:Pachycereus pringlei

message: This article claims that this is the tallest cactus in the world, but  says that the tallest saguaro ever measured was 78 feet tall - considerably taller than the 63 feet boasted by the tallest specimen of this species. Apparently, it blew over in a storm in the 1980s. Seems like it might be worth clarifying? Titanium Dragon (talk) 09:27, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Tallest Cactus

message: This is the first time I've added a photo to the gallery and I'm not sure if I did it correctly. It's the close up photo. Please feel free to move it or change the alt-text as needed. LesserGoldfinch (talk) 02:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not seeing it published to the page, though I did publish the changes. Any help is appreciated! LesserGoldfinch (talk) 03:01, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, figuring this out as I go. The file is on WikiMedia Commons but not showing on the page. :File:Close up of a single Pachycereus pringlei plant.jpg LesserGoldfinch (talk) 03:04, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Figured out I was in edit source mode rather than edit mode. Correctly uploaded to gallery! LesserGoldfinch (talk) 03:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding photo to the gallery 

message: — Assignment last updated by Warmedforbs (talk) 01:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Applied Plant Ecology Winter 2024
Talk:Pachycereus

message: The greek word for "thick" is "παχύς" (maskuline) or "παχύ" (neutral) ["παχιά" (feminine)], so "pakhus" should be corrected as: "pakhys". The latin ending "-us" is corresponding to the greek ending "-ος", so "pakhus" is corresponding to the greek word "πάχος" which means "thickness".
Since I don't know how to edit the article, I edited this text at the "talk" page, I hope sbd. will read this to correct the article. Anjius (talk) 14:02, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I added the actual Greek word. Transliterating Greek is always an issue: what to use for χ ('kh' or 'ch' or even just 'h') and what to use for υ ('u' or 'y' – or even 'i' for Modern Greek). I think 'pakhus' is acceptable, provided the actual Greek word is given, but given the genus name, 'pachys' would be better. Peter coxhead (talk) 14:33, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

text: Please, accept my apology for using the wrong word “corrected” instead of “changed” which is closer to what I meant. The use of "kh" instead of "ch" is another issue; I could also propose the change of “kh” with “ch” in the word “pakhus” also, but I didn’t (I don't know why). Both forms “pakhus” and “pachys” are acceptable as forms of the actual Greek word, with the 2nd form more often used, closer to the genus name and closer to the pronunciation (and more preferred by me, for all these reasons), while the 1st one uses the “kh” which is closer to the formation of the letter “χ”  and the “u” which is closer to the origin of the letter ”u” from the letter “υ”, so, I agree that "pachys" would be better. Anjius (talk) 09:28, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: "pakhys" instead of "pakhus"
Talk:Epiphyllum

message: Anderson in The Cactus Family (2001), p. 286 says "One encounters numerous so-called epiphyllum hybrids, which in fact rarely involve species of Epiphyllum as a parent. Rather these magnificent plants [...] are mostly hybrids of related genera such as Disocactus, Pseudorhipsalis and Selenicereus."
The article needs to be revised to reflect this. Unfortunately I don't have time now. Peter coxhead (talk) 13:01, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs major revisions
Talk:Taxonomy of the Cactaceae

message: I've added a section on the Nyffeler & Eggli (2010) classification. The older classification really needs de-emphasizing now; it's very out-of-date. There are other systems:
*, the German Wikipedia article at :de:Systematik der Kakteengewächse had a system sourced to Anderson (2005), Das grosse Kakteen-Lexikon – although the book is often cited as "translated by U. Eggli", this is misleading as regards the classification, since this was updated by Eggli (Anderson died in 2001). I don't think it's worth listing this now.
*There's a classification by Hunt et al. (2006) – in The New Cactus Lexicon – that should be at least mentioned, as it was used in CITES, I believe, and is mentioned in Red List entries for cacti. I don't have access to it at present. Does anyone?
Peter coxhead (talk) 10:35, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: 2010 classification
Talk:Ariocarpus

message: what does "pivoting root" mean, please? --173.176.62.183 (talk) 19:04, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A bad translation of the French racine pivotante. I replaced by thick central root. Such as carrots. Use better word if you have. --Tangopaso (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "pivoting root" 
Talk:Leuchtenbergia

message: Can it be right that this genus was named after Eugène, first Prince von Leuchtenberg?  He died in 1824, but the genus was not erected by Hooker until 1848.  It seems more likely that Hooker had in mind his son Maximilian, who was alive at the time.
It is a curious fact that Maximilian's granddaughter Daria married Lev Mikhailovich Kotschoubey (Кочубей), the grandson of Viktor Pavlovich Kotschoubey, after whom Ariocarpus kotschoubeyanus is named.Лудольф (talk) 19:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Talk:Sclerocactus

message: Revisions added today (Dec. 3, 2009) were written by cactusgirl in December, 2007 who has studied Sclerocactus over a span of 40+ years. Revised for accuracy, additional information, and references. Please note that Sclerocactus species may be sympatric, and common species may grow in the same area as rare species.  Rare species may be difficult for non-specialists to distinguish.  Also cacti are often not treated accurately in flora by non-specialist botanists. They are a special study, and many botanists avoid them because of the difficulty of preparing and storing specimens.  Nomenclature follows Flora of North America Online, the best published reference on Sclerocactus as of December 2007.  
--Tfrates (talk) 20:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sclerocactus page updates
Talk:Strombocactus

message: As a note, there's two subspecies  - maybe that's where the confusion came from. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 19:11, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, sounds plausible. Peter coxhead (talk) 00:39, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Monotypic
Talk:Ceroid cactus

message: This article seems very muddled to me. There is a general English use of the word "cereus", distinct from the genus Cereus, which could usefully be briefly described. I see no point in listing all the genera in the Classification section, where the detail just duplicates what is at Classification of the Cactaceae. It would be sufficient to just list tribes which are sometimes called "cereus" or "cereiform", or more efficiently say that it can be used for most Cactoideae and then list the exceptions. The Taxonomy section mostly belongs to the article about the genus and is inappropriate for a general term. (I've already removed the taxobox.) Peter coxhead (talk) 22:13, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved the article from "Cereus" (which is properly the name of the genus Cereus) to "Ceroid cactus" (a Google search shows this is much more common than the possible alternative "Ceriform cactus". I've removed the material on classification which duplicates Classification of the Cactaceae without clear relevance. I'll continue to work on the article to try to improve it as a general article about ceroid cacti. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:01, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Muddled article
File talk:Yucatán Peninsula.png

message: The area highlighted on this map includes much more than just the Yucatán Peninsula. Could we please get another map? Backspace 04:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, if used to illlustrate the peninsula then it is clearly misleading. Will see about making a substitute.--cjllw ʘ TALK 02:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

text: OK, I've now made and uploaded a quick replacement version, with shading which better indicates the peninsula.--cjllw ʘ TALK 03:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Hylocereus

message: Are we just using sentence fragments for wikipedia now?  I would change it, but I'm not exactly sure what the author intended.  Especially with the phrase "Besides..."  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.165.210.64 (talk) 03:22, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Now re-written. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:31, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Taxonomy Section
Talk:Vietnam National University, Hanoi

message: *Plsease rename the article about this university. The Vietnamese name is Dai hoc Quoc gia Ha Noi which exactly means Hanoi National University or Vietnam National University, Hanoi not Vietnam National University Genghiskhanviet 09:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I think that it should be moved to Vietnam National University, Hanoi, they refer to themselves as that on the English language version of their website. --A10203040 04:43, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

message: :The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 
Vietnam National University → Vietnam National University, Hanoi — They refer to themselves as Vietnam National University, Hanoi on the English language section of their homepage. As Genghiskhanviet noted above, this translation of Dai hoc Quoc gia Ha Noi appears more correct than just Vietnam National University. A10203040 05:03, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Add  # Support  or  # Oppose  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.  Please remember that this is not a vote; comments must include reasons to carry weight.
*Support According to this page: , there are two Vietnam National Universities, one in Hanoi and one in Ho Chi Minh City. Joeldl 01:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
This article has been renamed  as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 08:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: :Add  # Support  or  # Oppose  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.  Please remember that this is not a vote; comments must include reasons to carry weight.
*Support According to this page: , there are two Vietnam National Universities, one in Hanoi and one in Ho Chi Minh City. Joeldl 01:14, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal.  Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.</div>
This article has been renamed  as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 08:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey
Talk:Burapha University

message: Would you consider mentioning something about the Confucius Institute at Burapha to this wiki page, and in turn also acknowledge Wenzhou Medical College's role as its co-creator.
Also, please link the article to Wenzhou Medical College, a newly created wiki page. Thank you
Compendium wmc (talk) 05:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confucius Institute 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Economic Corridor Medical Genomics Industry Zone. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  signed, Rosguill talk 22:21, 10 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Economic Corridor Medical Genomics Industry Zone" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 
Talk:Cephalocereus

message: found (native) in other places besides mexico- ie Cephalocereus cf. melanurus is found in Brazil  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.57.135.252 (talk) 21:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Peniocereus

message: I've removed an unsourced statement about genera that have been synonymized with Peniocereus. The Plant List places Peniocereus serpentinus=Nyctocereus serpentinus in Disocactus flagelliformis. NCBI doesn't (yet) use this classification, however, so a complete reworking of the material here would be premature. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 13:41, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synonymy
Talk:Rhipsalis

message: I have merged Hatiora here and made that age a redirect. But I have left the previous content there, outcommented (see source). It seems the de: has a complete list of spp. in both genera, but it's better to be safe then sorry, and since "if you don't know where to split - lump!", I lumped as an interim measure.
We need a scholarly ref that is up to date and gives full species lists and delimitation. Perhaps it's best to do a quick reality check of the de: articles, and if they are good in that respect, simply translate them and restore Hatiora. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 00:19, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: ''Hatiroa''
Talk:Hatiora

message: Note copied from Talk:Schlumbergera:
The Easter Cactus was called Schlumbergera gaertneri (Regel) Britton & Rose back in the 1970s, at the same time that the Christmas cactus was usually called Zygocactus truncatus. Both this article [Schlumbergera] and Hatiora should probably mention that.--Curtis Clark (talk) 02:09, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added at note in the Schlumbergera article. This article needs an expanded Taxonomy section, when this information should be included. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:04, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now expanded the discussion of the taxonomy of the genus; not sure if it's of any great interest to anyone! Peter coxhead (talk) 12:38, 1 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copied note 

message: The move of Hatiora subgenus Rhipsalidopsis to Schlumbergera seems to be more-or-less accepted now (e.g. it's in Plants of the World Online), so I think we should make the move. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:50, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Move back to ''Schlumbergera''
Talk:Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975

message: The act was overturned by a three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals, which means that the full court may yet reverse that decision.  Miraculouschaos 04:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay.  Thanks for clarifying this. --Aude (talk) 04:59, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Act overturned on appeal

message: The evaluation section is incomplete and needs more work.  I will try to find some references. Kevinp2 (talk) 16:17, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Evaluation

message: Parts of the article seemed to be written in a pro gun-rights way, such as: "thus amounting to a prohibition on the use of firearms for self-defense in the home" and "Any benefits of the firearms law are weighed against the impact on personal liberty and rights under the United States Constitution's Second Amendment." --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 03:04, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh...I guess it's kinda biased.  I only think it's a few lines.  sohmc (talk) 14:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

text: I cleaned up some of the language.  Please note that the phrase: "thus amounting to a prohibition on the use of firearms for self-defense in the home" is taken directly from a court decision on the subject (see the reference). kevinp2 (talk) 03:08, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: pro gun-rights?
Talk:Khon Kaen University

message: Any news articles or images about the following from the entry Isan language?
Signage in Isan written in the Tai Noi script was installed throughout Khon Kaen University in 2013. Students were surveyed after the signs were put up, and most had a favorable reaction to the signage, as over 73 per cent had no knowledge of a previous writing system prior to the forced adoption of the Thai language and alphabet.
Thanks for considering. --Apisite (talk) 19:36, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tai Noi Signage