Talk:Papaver somniferum

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Papaver flower.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on June 10, 2012. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2012-06-10. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! —howcheng  {chat} 21:52, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Papaver flower.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon 

message: I'm not seeing anything about its ordinary growing conditions.  My guess is semi-arid, but I haven't found any source that says one way or another.  Dismalscholar (talk) 08:05, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:   Growing conditions  

message: There is no mention in this article as to whether this plant is annual, perennial or biennial (it is annual, apparently). Perhaps too much effort has been spent trying to maintain neutrality concerning the narcotic alkaloids present than on actually describing the species. Shouldn't a description of the plant the primary focus of the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.131.101.107 (talk) 04:30, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Growth habit 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Papaver somniferum. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090729120251/http://www.regional.org.au:80/au/asa/2001/news.htm to http://www.regional.org.au/au/asa/2001/news.htm#P54_6133
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Quinto Simmaco (talk) 02:01, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The claim that most available cultivars are high in opium seems very questionable. Worse yet, the source that was cited seems very dubious. The link is dead and was archived twice in 2015 by the Internet Archive. See for yourself how dubious this information appears to be based on the low quality of the source. The source's information, which is presented as assorted vague supposition, is also very old (2006).
https://web.archive.org/web/20150402164716/http://www.opiumpoppies.org/faq/introduction/how-potent-are-the-major-culinary-spicerack-varieties-such-as-mccormick/
:Yes, that's a bad source. The sentence on relative morphine content is questionable, having no source. --Zefr (talk) 17:38, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apparently bogus source removed 

message: The rules are absolutely clear - no spam on Wikipedia. The links I removed were WP:REFSPAM. See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources#Vendor_and_e-commerce_sources
prohibits linking to "Individual web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services, WP:QUESTIONABLE, WP:ADMASK, WP:PROMOTION and the template { {refimprove-spam} }. Senor Cuete (talk) 16:20, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  No commercial links on Wikipedia 

message: Hello we are a group of Agricultural Science and Environmental Science students from ETH of Zurich and would like to make some changes in the wiki page of papaver somniferum within the next weeks. Firstly we think that the Varieties section could be greatly improved. Secondly we'll add general information about Agronomic parameters of p. somniferum cultivation regarding Growth Development, weed management and potential occurring diseases and their management. Finally, we'll introduce additional infos about the world production and market share of poppy. 
We'll happy to hear what you think about these suggestions. 
Bests, 
Poppy Group  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zngameni (talk • contribs) 10:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agricultural Cultivation (Growth Development, Weed Management), Diseases and World market share