Talk:Amorphophallus titanum

message: I am not sure we should list every known bloom since there seem to have been a lot of them.  Reading the current page, it seems like the flower has only bloomed 3 or 4 times, which is not true.  Also, people keep track of the size of the different blossoms, I have not included that information here.
List of known Titan arum blooms:
* 1889 Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew (First known flowering not in the wild) http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/titan/history.html
* 1926 Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/titan/history.html
* 1932 Botanic Garden of Wageningen in the Netherlands http://www.botanik.uni-bonn.de/botgart/amorpho2003e.html
* August 1937 	New York Botanical Garden, NY http://www.fairchildgarden.org/blooms/amorphophallus-history.html
* July 2, 1939 	New York Botanical Garden, NY http://www.fairchildgarden.org/blooms/amorphophallus-history.html
* July 1996 Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/titan/history.html
* June 25, 1998 Fairchild Tropical Garden http://www.fairchildgarden.org/blooms/amorphophallus98.html
* May 21, 1999 Marie Selby Botanical Gardens http://www.selby.org/research/titanum/titan2k1.htm
* Summer 1999, University of Washington, Seattle 
http://www.washington.edu/newsroom/news/2002archive/05-02archive/k052902.html
* July 7, 1999 Fullerton Arboretum California State University at Fullerton http://www.washington.edu/newsroom/news/1999archive/07-99archive/k070999a.html
* August 1, 1999 The Huntington Library, Art Collections, and Botanical Gardens http://www.huntington.org/BotanicalDiv/TitanIntro.htm
* September 3, 1999 Fairchild Tropical Garden http://www.ftg.org/blooms/amorphophallus.html
* July 7, 2000 Botanic Gardens University of Bonn http://www.botanik.uni-bonn.de/botgart/amorpho2003e.html
* June 12, 2000 Atlanta Botanical Garden http://biology.fullerton.edu/facilities/greenhouse/amorphophallus/index.html
* June 13, 2000 Fullerton Arboretum California State University at Fullerton http://biology.fullerton.edu/facilities/greenhouse/amorphophallus/index.html
* May 7, 2001 University of Washington, Seattle http://www.fairchildgarden.org/blooms/amorphophallus01-2.html
* May 15, 2001 Fairchild Tropical Garden http://www.fairchildgarden.org/blooms/amorphophallus01.html
* May 2001 Marie Selby Botanical Gardens http://www.selby.org/research/titanum/titan2k1.htm
* June 7, 2001 University of Wisconsin-Madison http://www.news.wisc.edu/titanarum2001/
* June 27, 2001 	Fairchild Tropical Garden http://www.fairchildgarden.org/blooms/amorphophallus-history.html
* May 1, 2002 Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/titan/timeline1.html
* May 29, 2002 University of Washington, Seattle http://www.washington.edu/newsroom/news/2002archive/05-02archive/k052902.html
* June 1, 2002 Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew  http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/titan/timeline2.html
* June 20, 2002 Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/titan/timeline.html
* July 31, 2002 University of Wisconsin-Madison http://www.news.wisc.edu/titanarum2002/
* August 7, 2002 Huntington Botanical Gardens http://www.huntington.org/BotanicalDiv/Titan2002/Titan2002.html
* May 23, 2003  Fullerton Arboretum California State University at Fullerton http://biology.fullerton.edu/facilities/greenhouse/amorphophallus/index.html
* May 23, 2003 Botanic Gardens University of Bonn http://www.botanik.uni-bonn.de/botgart/amorpho2003e.html
* June 10, 2003 University of California, Davis http://www.magpienest.org/feathersofhope/archives/nature_and_place/
* June 10, 2003 Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/titan/index.html
* July 2, 2003 Le Conservatoire Botanique, Brest http://www.mairie-brest.fr/brest/arum_photos.htm
* July 23, 2003 United States Botanic Garden, Washington, DC 
More Resources:
* http://biology.fullerton.edu/facilities/greenhouse/amorphophallus/index.html At the bottom they have links to other places with the titan
I am beginning to wonder whether we should keep the list of flowerings, or move it to another article.  It is clear that plenty of specimens are being grown in many botanical gardens (Kew has had 3 flowerings in 2002, 1 in 2003, 3 in 2005 and 2 in 2006 so far - and some of these are not mentioned here yet!). -- ALoan (Talk) 19:05, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: list

message: Why isn't there a disambiguation between this and corpse flower. It even says in the article "the same title is also attributed to Rafflesia." Corpse flower and "giant corpse flower" redirect to Rafflesia. There should definitely be an option to pick which one you're looking for, because the causal reader isn't going to know the latin name; they're going to know giant corpse flower, and I'd say chances are good that *this*, not Rafflesia is what they're looking for. Freshyill 15:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs disambiguation 

message: I love how specific the article is on this point; not decomposing flesh, not a decomposing animal, but a decomposing mammal. It seems very silly to me, but I'm reluctant to change it... in case there is a difference :D — riana_dzasta wreak havoc-damage report  16:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The more pertinent question perhaps is whether the insects that are attracted by the flower's stench can tell whether the smell might be a mammal rotting instead of a less appetizing type of animal rotting.  Whether we can smell the difference is not really relevant (at least not relevant from the flower's point of view, an insect's point of view,  an evolutionary point of view, or a botanical/entomological point of view).Anythingyouwant (talk) 11:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  smell 

message: link.  Perhaps they should be added to the list, or once they actually bloom in any case. Esn 08:10, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Two about to happen

message: I will park this image here, it might be some use. I will try and discover where the artist found source material. Cygnis insignis 12:05, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Image 

message: Hi everyone,
I'm sorry because I might have missed some of the guidelines which might be required, please tell me if I forgot any, thanks.
Anyway, I just wanted to tell you guys that there are 2 articles which have different titles which talk about the same subject, these two articles are Amorphophallus 
and Titan arum (which is this article), I think that they should both be joined together into one article.
 Thanks, 
Cpt Adham (talk) 19:14, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi all, please discard this discussion topic since it has been replied to on the Amorphophallus discussion page, 
Thank you,
Cpt Adham (talk) 13:15, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeated article 

message: Titan arum → Amorphophallus titanum — as per WP:NOTCENSORED — cygnis insignis 12:49, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move 1

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
*Oppose. The appeal to not censored is a fallacy; Titan arum is the common name. (Anyway I can't imagine how the latin would be considered offensive except in parody, but that's not the issue.) Andrewa (talk) 19:41, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: This Slashdot news update is very relevant to this article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.121.34.88 (talk) 04:10, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Slashdotted 

message: This is missing some facts:
The Titan Arum lives 40 years and only flowers a few times in its life.
The leaf actually makes it look like a tree.
We should also get a pic of it in leaf.
--DMKTirpitz (talk) 05:11, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  More on biological life  

message: Since my recent taxobox heading edit was reverted, I thought we should discuss the details here.  This is regarding whether that taxobox heading should be the same sceintific name as the article or should be one of the common names.  Mgiganteus, perhaps you are confusing plant taxoboxes with those for fauna?  They do have different conventions.  Plant headings should follow the same scientific names as outlined in WP:FLORA, which was the basis for the recent name change, and all other living things should use the common name.  Please see  Wikipedia:Taxobox_usage#Name.  Best regards. :)  -- Tom Hulse (talk) 22:34, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It was my (perhaps mistaken) impression that where there exists a single major common name this is often used in the taxobox irrespective of the article title, as this arrangement is slightly less repetitive (2 vs. 3 instances of the binomial). However, as you point out, the taxobox usage guidelines do not appear to support this. Either way, it's no biggie. :-) mgiganteus1 (talk) 23:05, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxobox heading 

message: This picture currently appears in the article captioned "Showing height comparison to a woman".  But due to the forced perspective from the plant being in the foreground, it is actually impossible to easily judge the woman's height in relation to it.
If this was an advertisement or an artistic photo I'd have no complaint with it, but in an encyclopedia something that's provided
for the purpose of illustrating scale should actually allow the user to see the scale.
I'm deleting the caption and substituting "With a woman", but if a similar photo without the forced perspective is available, it would be better to use that.
--142.205.241.254 (talk) 22:17, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bogus height comparison 

message: Under "Cultivation", the meaning of this sentence evades me:
"The titan arum is more commonly available to the advanced gardener due to pollination techniques. "
Pollifax (talk) 23:51, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarity, please 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Amorphophallus titanum. 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/20130810221200/http://www.huntington.org/huntingtonlibrary.aspx?id=4132 to http://www.huntington.org/huntingtonlibrary.aspx?id=4132
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160209061418/https://cbs.umn.edu/conservatory/welcome to http://cbs.umn.edu/conservatory/welcome
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050215180031/http://www.callipygian.com:80/3D/corpseplant.html to http://www.callipygian.com/3D/corpseplant.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051110210407/http://www.news.wisc.edu:80/titanarum2005/bloomings.html to http://www.news.wisc.edu/titanarum2005/bloomings.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:35, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm a bit unsure about the current status as listed in the Infobox. I didn't find an entry for the species on IUCN. Other Amorphophallus species, yes, but not this one. Perhaps I'm missing something or maybe it was listed in a prior IUCN version. It was this edit which introduced the status. Thanks Declangi (talk) 04:52, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting. There does not seem to be an assessment for this species, neither current nor previous, and not under either of its synonyms. I wonder why - it's certainly the best known of the bunch. I've removed the unreferenced taxobox conservation note for now (& added the synonyms). -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:15, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  IUCN status 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Amorphophallus titanum. 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/20081015142257/http://www.kew.org/ksheets/pdfs/o10titanarum.pdf to http://www.kew.org/ksheets/pdfs/o10titanarum.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160209061418/https://cbs.umn.edu/conservatory/welcome to http://cbs.umn.edu/conservatory/welcome
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.callipygian.com/3D/corpseplant.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.news.wisc.edu/titanarum2005/bloomings.html
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) 04:55, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Edits by  to this article have removed numerous existing references. In particular, the IUCN reference has been removed twice now, in the latter instance after I had restored the reference. I'm restoring this reference now for a second time, as IUCN status should be supported by an IUCN reference. IUCN parameters in Speciesboxes are described at Template:Speciesbox and elsewhere. 
I will leave reviewing the other removed references and those added by Issempa (really only four new references, repeated) to those who know more about this species than I. Declangi (talk) 08:36, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  References removed 

message: I am currently working on cleaning up the gallery. We don’t really need 5 pictures of the plant at the same zoomed out level do we? I’ve included the old one here in case someone wants to swap out the images.
 Jake01756 🗩 🖉 06:53, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gallery Cleanup 

message: The leaf grows on a somewhat green stalk that branches into three sections at the top, each containing many leaflets
"Stalk" "many leaflets". Please update with the appropriate morphology and dimensions. --Pitke (talk) 09:13, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unhelpful vagueness about leaf