Talk:Vine

message: The article has:  Generally, climbers are always woody vines, while nonwoody or herbaceous vines are not climbers but rather groundcovers.  This seems wrong.  I'm thinking of morning glories and bindweeds, annual beans, various cucurbits...  Am I missing something?  Pekinensis 22:51, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Climbers and grouncovers 

message: I'd like to try growing ivy (or some other non-poisonous climbing plant) indoors, as a wall decoration. I need a plant that grows year round and can work with low sunlight. Can somebody reccomend me a vine or two? -Litefantastic 02:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Growing

message: I just tried to clarify a bit the difference between recent North American (anything vinelike is a vine, grapes come from grapevines) and traditional/British usage (a vine is something with grapes) usage.  I can't speak to Antipodean or African usage on that, though.  I hope someone familiar with local usage in the tropics can expand.  (The OED marks the broader sense as strictly US, but I'm pretty sure it's also Canadian, and I suspect it may be exist to some extent in other Commonwealth countries as well.) Tkinias 16:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's quite common in British English as well. - MPF 14:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to challenge the British English/North American English distinction asserted in this article unless it can be supported a bit more authoritatively.  While I'm not familiar with the British usage of the word, on checking a rather old edition of Encyclopedia Britannica in my department library, it gives the broad (so-called "North American") definition of "vine" and does not restrict the usage of the word to Vitaceae at all. MrDarwin (talk) 21:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think I'm with this synonymy of "climbing plant" with "vine". The page on vines doesn't really cover the range discussed by Darwin and Fritz Müller. There is room for a separate page on climbing plants IMO. Macdonald-ross (talk) 10:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: I was thinking of doing a science project on vines. "Do you vines have eyes?" is my question. Do vines know where they are going when they reach out and attach themselves to near by objects? Please give me any comments or answers to my question. Lilcocomojoe579 16:23, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Science Fair Project 

message: Is there any difference between "Liana" and "Vine" ??? Can you give me examples of vines and lianas? Thanks, :cs:Wikipedista:Vojtech.dostal  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.20.74.230 (talk) 18:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A liana is a woody climber, whereas a vine/climber does not necessarily need to have woody tissue. Lianas are often also called vines, but the reverse is not always true. Djlayton4 | talk  |  contribs 00:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question - vine vs. liana 

message: I'm no expert, but the plant that is climbing the ladder in a pic looks more like a bine to me, possibly Ipomoea alba or something. There seems to be confusion among the two terms, and perhaps bines are considered a type of vine? Just putting this out there.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.244.164.109 (talk) 03:04, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ladder pic may be bine? 

message: One of the greatest assets of Wikipedia is it's intrinsic educational entertainment value.
This page lacks most of it.
It can be easily achieved by adding a few comparative notes (us humans being hyerarchically inclined) between fastest growers, different support attachment methods and way of growth of the attachment organs. Whilst it is not particularly easy to avoid speculation, there is a well known hunger for factoids in the educational entertainment consumer and, let's face it, the bulk of the donors when need arises are not the ones using Wikipedia for technical reasons, but the wiki-trippers that tap into one page out of curiosity and end up spending hours of navigating the links.
Thus, out of a purely economical point of view, the sprinkling of a page with interesting, objective, non-speculative factoids, such as, on this "vine" page, wich one has the fastest relative growth or wich one can make use of most types of support, can provide the "educational entertainment" factor both Wikipedia and the Discovery Channel owe much of their popularity to.
Besides, WIkipedia benefits from the interactive quality of users being able to add what they like and, by human group spirit, what others like too.
Although this makes for a more arduous cleanup work, it also creates the long term benefit of evolving Wikipedia into the one-stop-shop for knowledge and entertainment that might have a profound effect on the future of humankind, via likes and shaping their environement. Who would you rather have in the nation's administration, a porn consumer, or a Wikipedia fanatic ? I'd vote (choice, non-political) for the latter.
In this way, a bit of knowledge salt and pepper has the potential of shaping the future. We are what we like, we become what we dream, we dream of what we like. Spiral evolution.
Note: "Temporary" in the title signifies that this section is to be removed upon necessary changes being effectuated.
Felix a.k.a. BlackTomcat (animal, not fighter jet)
BlackTomcat (talk) 09:00, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temporary - The Enthusiasm Factor 

message: Vine plants are linked up in other languages but not connected to this article. I don't understand how to fix this, but maybe someone can help. Here's the Spanish article on the same subject for example: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planta_de_gu%C3%ADa  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dbarthelme (talk • contribs) 07:48, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to have been fixed by somebody. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 13:23, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad language linking 

message: Seems like Bine (botany) ought to be merged into here, explaining that modern botanical works use the term twining vine instead of bine. --MCEllis (talk) 18:45, 22 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Support merge. I don't think we have yet found, though, a citation that states that "bine" is obsolete, though we have several large botanical glossaries that omit it. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 13:27, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

text: Support, seems redundant and this is the first I have heard of the term "bine". Zedshort (talk) 18:19, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Support, as the terms bine and vine might be confused, it seems reasonable to discuss them on the same page, particularly given that twining vine seems to be in more modern use. Klbrain (talk) 23:04, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Merge: [[Bine (botany)]] → [[Vine]] 

message: Please change the false information.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DustyRedSkies (talk • contribs) 15:21, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Assuming this refers to your recent edits: if you have a more reliable source than the Shorter OED for English usage, then please cite it.  (I'm not saying there are none, but you haven't cited them.)  Keep in mind that verifiability is one of the standards on Wikipedia. Nitpicking polish (talk) 18:58, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  UK Usage 

message: vines that have evolved in much  LOWER LIGHT  conditions, vary a lot from  open-air  ones like grapevines,
so a section with critical differences, including the HIGHER potential for more TYPES of adaptions,
in a MORE COMPEDATIVE envrionment that causes infirect diversification (just as much as any other plant/stem-org), 
such as ones under-canopies, would help to clarify which and under WHICH CONDITIONS, more diversification, and VALUE, develop from, different cirsumstnaces of evolutionary pressure/need/oppertunity, etc.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vurrath (talk • contribs) 23:33, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Need for under leaf-cover or exposed vine species differentiation / distinctions 

message: This page keeps being changed and changed every time with not funny results.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thewinrat (talk • contribs) 18:53, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: , requests for page protection should be posted at WP:RfPP (see page header for more details) as only admins can protects specific articles - usually after serious recurring disruption. But of course all improvements (and fixes of the occasional vandalism) are also appreciated, if you'd like to contribute to the article. GermanJoe (talk) 19:05, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  SemiProtect Please? 

message: * 
Semi-protection: High level of IP vandalism. Thewinrat (talk) 19:09, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[SEMIPROTECT]] 

message: And how do they reproduce?
DESDICHADO (talk) 23:23, 31 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  WHAT CAUSES PLANTS TO BE VINES? 

message: Lukasbarrie (talk) 08:37, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. GermanJoe (talk) 09:51, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 16 May 2018 

message: § Scientific description is tagged 
: , =It is the work of a student editor, it needs verification, and may be overly technical for this article, =May 2018
I'm no expert in botany, but I knows formal English pretty good ;-). I've copyedited and wikilinked here in the interest of making the text somewhat less opaque to a non-specialist— especially with terms for which a "define ___" web search, finds no definitions in the sense used here. I haven't removed the tag, though. --Thnidu (talk) 20:31, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attention from an expert 

message: The pictures for left-handed and right-handed bines contradict the definitions.  For example, the definitions for "left-handed" says that it "grows in an anticlockwise direction from the ground."  But if you look at the picture for L, it twines in a clockwise direction (as seen from above) as it goes up.
I will not correct this myself, for two reasons.  One is that I'm not great at markup.  The other is that, without knowing a lot more about the terminology (including S-twist and Z-twist), I couldn't resolve the contradiction without risking making *both* wrong.  So someone please fix it.
Evan W Morton (talk) 03:31, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  diagrams for left- and right-handed contradict definitions