lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Loganiaceae

message: The final sentence of the lead says: "Recent DNA studies of the Gentianales have found strong support for the Loganiaceae (as defined here) as a clade containing 13 genera." Uncited, but looks like this refers to the American Journal of Botany paper cited in Excluded genera, that paper from 1999. The genera list in the Taxobox cites GRIN (with a now-broken URL), but that's here and has 25 genera. The GRIN family record says last updated Jan 2017 but no other reference given.
Just wondering if anyone has thoughts on which source for the genera list might be definitive. Thanks Declangi (talk) 03:46, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: the GRIN list you linked above includes synonyms (e.g. click on Couthovia).  I haven't checked them all, but I think it's the same 13.  See also APweb's list – APweb is often a good source of genus lists. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:06, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks, Peter, you're correct on GRIN. I hadn't clicked through the genera on their list. Elsewhere in GRIN, I think I've seen synonyms appended with a second "=" line indicating the accepted name. Anyway, excluding synonyms, the lists in GRIN and the AJB paper do match with the same 13 genera. However the APweb list, which usefully indicates synonyms, has Labordia as a synonym of Geniostoma, making for 12 genera. The other entries match GRIN and AJB. Declangi (talk) 10:14, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  well, Gibbons et al. (2012) supports the synonymy of some species of Labordia with Geniostoma. APweb seems to have anticipated changes only suggested in this paper, because on the main page it says "For relationships in Loganieae, see Gibbons et al. (2012); generic limits will have to be adjusted." However, there's no more recent paper cited for the adjustment. So it seems that the best that can be said is that genera in Loganiaceae: Loganieae are currently uncertain. Peter coxhead (talk) 14:42, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  many thanks again. I've taken a look at the paper you supplied. As you say the genera list remains a little uncertain. I added your paper to the Genera section along with a couple of sentences indicating the uncertainty. Hopefully my additions have not confused matters. Declangi (talk) 08:46, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I think this is exactly the kind of comment that should be present in more articles. I see far too many taxon articles with unsourced or poorly sourced lists of subtaxa set out as though they were unchallengeable facts rather than taxonomic opinions. (Rant: Wikispecies and Wikidata compound this problem because they present one version of the taxonomic hierarchy without the scope for qualification that Wikipedia articles make possible, even if they don't always do it.) Peter coxhead (talk) 08:57, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definitive list of genera
Talk:Monimiaceae

message: The subfamily Monimioideae has been entirely omitted. The error was made on 1 Feb 2006, and i am surprised that no one has noticed it. I will fix this problem in a few days after i have read some material on Monimiaceae. The article might need to be substantially revised. 72.234.212.108 (talk) 23:07, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Omitted subfamily 

message: The image that is now in the taxobox was published as Tambourissa elliptica. According to The Plant List, as of 2013, this is an unresolved name. I think it okay to treat the image as an undetermined species of Tambourissa. 72.234.240.55 (talk) 05:19, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unresolved name
Talk:Hughson Street

message: See Wikipedia:Footnotes for an explanation of how to generate footnotes using the <ref(erences/)> tags  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nhl4hamilton (talk • contribs) 05:24, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: References
Talk:Saci (Brazilian folklore)

message: This article seems to be mostly a re-use of the World Heritage Encyclopedia (licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 source by the World Public Library) article of the same name. This is a legitimate re-use so there should be no problem with this.  Most of the source material it is based on is in Portuguese and so is difficult for English-only readers to access. Having looked extensively, there are not many helpful on-line sources in English. Although there are some stylistic differences in how it is written compared to standard Wikipedia articles, it seems that it is better to accept the material as is for now and upgrade it to be more in line with Wikipedia standards as more English sources (or Portuguese/English bilingual Wikipedia editors) become available.
WikiA2K (talk) 01:06, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It's the reverse; "World Heritage Encyclopedia" is a mirror of the material here. They include credit to Wikipedia on their many domains, albeit a little hidden. Kuru (talk) 01:42, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legit re-use of World Heritage Encyclopedia article 

message: The current image (:File:Saci.jpg) shows a "symmetrical" inhuman saci with only one leg right in the middle of the body. I'm Brazilian and the oral story I'm familiar with (and a handful of people I consulted) describe saci as having the shape of someone who had two legs but lost one, therefore being assymetrical. So, a better image for this article would show saci having just the right or the left leg (instead of having a "middle" led). If such an image is available, the current should be replaced. Mateussf (talk) 02:03, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image depiction of leg
Talk:Munson Medical Center

message: The phrase "is a top-quality" in the first sentence sounds like promotional talk, even if it is substantiated. Should this be edited? --Redunitone (talk) 21:37, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Is top-quality promotional wording or should it be substantiated?

message: The reference to being the only trauma center north of Grand Rapids seems inaccurate since there are others on the East side of the state in Flint, Saginaw and so forth. Plus it sounds like promotional copy. Is there a better way to phrase this? Redunitone (talk) 02:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Issues with Page
Talk:Nelumbo

message: Would someone who knows a lot more than me about botany please take a look at :Commons:Image:Juanita Bay - lily pads.jpg and tell me if I am correct to identify these as Nelumbo lutea (and, if not, please change the caption and possibly the category accordingly). & then say here that this has been done so someone else doesn't waste their time. Thanks. - Jmabel | Talk 05:22, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commons picture needs verification
Talk:Barium peroxide

message: I changed NFPA from health : 1 and reactivity : 0 to health : 3, reactivity : 3, according to the MSDS linked as reference.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.121.212.45 (talk) 21:25, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That is incorrect. The original was using the correct NFPA ratings (section 16 in the referenced MSDS), while you replaced them with the JTBaker codes. However, this MSDS is long out of date.  I will update to the current NFPA rating (H=2, R=2) with proper references.JaredAllred (talk) 22:07, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: NFPA
Talk:Combretaceae

message: It appears that the species of Quisqualis have been moved to another genus, but I don't believe it's necessarily Combretum (though it may be true of 'C. indicum).  A WP search for the term Quisqualis yields a redirect to Combretaceae rather than to Combretum. Does anyone know how this sorts out?--Quisqualis (talk) 01:02, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  What became of the genus Quisqualis?
Talk:Aextoxicon

message: The Wiki Plants project is excellent and fills a major gap in accessibility to knowledge. I stumble however on the exclusive use of the Spanish or ladino names of the species. All the visible and in some way relevant species had indigenous names established before the European invasion of the continent later called America. Some of these names are still widely used, and even those less used, or fallen out of use, deserve to be mentioned to make justice to "first arrived, first served" and as a cultural fact. A. punctatum is widely known as tique, E. cordifolia as muermo, etc. I intend to edit this article and other similar ones in this sense - unless someone here objects? --Lupo Manaro 08:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Talk:Haemodoraceae

message: I hesitated to change this section title since there may be a link to it somewhere out there.   This reads as if the plant itself is capable of finding something confusing... as opposed to a person becoming confused about the plant and its name and relatives.  Perhaps "Plants also called bloodworts" might be a better section title?MargaretRDonald (talk) 07:10, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potentially confused plants
Talk:Buxaceae

message: What about the apg III SYSTEM? 
And what about some close up pictures of leaves and fruit so the plant is actually identifiable close up?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.113.63.73 (talk) 09:30, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

message: If this helps: I was looking at this paper and saw the leaf life span for the Buxus sempervirens, Buxaceae. The LLS = 488 ± 28.6 (days). States: "This study was conducted in Mediterranean old-fields over a 4-yr period on 42 species differing in successional status." 
"Leaf life span, dynamics and construction cost of species from Mediterranean old-fields differing in successional status"
Marie-Laure Navas, Béatrice Ducout, Catherine Roumet, Jean Richarte, Joël Garnier, Eric Garnier.
New Phytologist,
Volume 159, Issue 1, pages 213–228, July 2003.
Article first published online: 12 JUN 2003
DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-8137.2003.00790.x
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1469-8137.2003.00790.x/full
Thank you, Wordreader (talk) 16:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leaf life span (LLS) 
Talk:Portulacaceae

message: how does one go about changing the title of the article.  It would be better to have it say: Portulacacea (purslane) since many only know it by the title purslane.
bpage (talk) 02:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussing it here is a good first step. We already have an article Purslane (which is where people would go from the search box), and there is a bolded purslane family in the first couple sentences. Furthermore, including something in parentheses is generally (always?) done for disambiguation, not in order to provide additional information about a term which is not ambiguous.  By disambiguation I mean something like Solaris (operating system) and Solaris (novel). Kingdon (talk) 22:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Changing title

message: The article now says: "...several genera were moved to the Montiaceae, Didiereaceae, Anacampserotaceae and Talinaceae...."
Which genera?
Thanks!!
philiptdotcom (talk) 05:18, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  which genera moved? 

message: The article should address more explicitly how dramatically the circumscription of the family has changed in recent years, in large part due to Portulacaceae s.l. turning out to be paraphyletic with regard to Cactaceae.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.111.254.17 (talk) 18:15, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Circumscription
Talk:Campanulaceae

message: i haven't read this article enough to judge quality (also because I'm not a Campanula freak, i.e., qualified to judge). but if i could find how to rate, I'd like to rate the wiki-p importance at "" because these are sizable group of "much loved" (drooled over)  plants.  2z2z 13:30, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  rating
Talk:Borium

message: This is an old edit from 2011, but thought you might know what "cane knives" meant. I know canes can be made with knives, but it seems unlikely for those knives to be made from something unusual. I wonder if "cane tips" would make sense. Thanks,  SchreiberBike | ⌨  01:54, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It could be like Cane knife, but I can't find any that say they use borium.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  01:57, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, ! I imagine that cane knife is indeed what was meant. However, I have just no idea where I got that stuff from – I was a very new editor at the time. There were two other references in the page, which someone has removed, and rightly so; the remaining ref is equally non-WP:RS. If the page is to be kept, this might be a suitable reference. But I think it should just be redirected to Tungsten carbide; with your agreement, I'll go ahead and do that. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:09, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  That makes sense to me. Go for it.  SchreiberBike | ⌨  20:47, 12 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: , . I was wrong about the ref I suggested above – it's self-published through lulu.com, so no good to us. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:55, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Cane knives"?
Talk:Saxifragaceae

message: The circumscription of this family (as with many plant families) has changed greatly in recent years. Articles should make note of these changes, and past circumscriptions, rather than simply giving the current circumscription (and by whose classification, which is may or may not be universally accepted).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.51.174.100 (talk) 14:44, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Family circumscription
Talk:Calcium borate

message: The article claims that Gerstley borate is just another name for calcium borate. I don’t know about what the term “Gerstley borate” refers to in other industries, but in the ceramic arts this claim is entirely false. Gerstley borate refers to the substance extracted from a certain (now-defunct) mine, it is not calcium borate, and in fact it does not even have a consistent chemical composition. You might be able to obtain calcium borate by reacting calcium metal with boric acid, but you definitely cannot obtain Gerstley borate this way.—Al12si (talk) 22:19, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Correct. Some references do claim that Gerstley borate is merely colemanite (calcium borate) but others indicate that Gerstley borate contains a somewhat variable amount of sodium as well. 75.90.146.120 (talk) 18:22, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Also called Gerstley borate?
Talk:Chlorate

message: As per title. I read a hint to chlorate instability, which lead to the preference of perchlorate over it in the field of pyrotechnics. What about aqueous solutions? Does chlorate spontaneously decay?
-obviously sorry if I'm asking for some obvious answer i failed to notice. Bear with me, and feel free to delete the question if it's unsuitable to be here-  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.16.179.79 (talk) 09:46, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request: what about Chlorate stability in an aqueous solution?
Talk:Chlorine monoxide

message: In the past, the term "chlorine monoxide" commonly referred to the compound Cl2O. Although the proper name for this formula is "dichlorine monoxide", such reference is still widely practiced in chemical industry including patent literature.
Yuri Omelchenko
--207.164.145.50 (talk) 15:48, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

message: Is the unpaired electron of the molecule situated on Cl, on O, or on the bond? The article  seems to state that ClO has its unpaired electron on the bond (the electrons above Cl and O are in fact not unpaired: three-center bond has only one unpaired electron), but SF and SeF have unpaired electrons on the chalcogen.Burzuchius (talk) 18:19, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Electronic structure
Talk:Copper(I) acetylide

message: If the material were a salt, as shown, would you not expect it to be unstable in water rather than just poorly soluble? I can't seem to find any good sources which discuss the bonding arraignments. --Project Osprey (talk) 11:32, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Covalence  
Talk:Marantaceae

message: Can we please get a complete list of the genera? Badagnani (talk) 06:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Genera
Talk:Cyanate

message: The Lewis structure for the cyanate ion seems incorrect. Oxygen has 6 valance electrons plus the added electron giving the ion a -1 charge. There should be 2 electron dots above and below the "O", so that the oxygen has 8 electrons: 2 on the left, 2 above, 2 below, and 2 in the shared bond with carbon. Also, don't polyatomic ions indicate charge by putting the Lewis structure in brackets with the charge indicated on the top right? — Parsa (talk) 00:14, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The number of electron pairs has been fix'd by now. Eric Kvaalen (talk) 11:25, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lewis Structure 

message: This article seems to be written is some form of foreign tongue...it needs to be revised and reworded into English that normal people can understand. 96.41.159.83 (talk) 06:04, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language 

message: Could someone who knows these references please write them out in full? Currently the references are written as last name of author (who might have written more than one book) and page number. Things like 'Nakamoto, Part A, p171' or 'Greenwood, p324' are unhelpful.
129.67.116.60 (talk) 15:53, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The shorthand references refer to the sources listed in full under the "Bibliography" heading. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:55, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  References are written in shorthand 

message: You added that the silver cyanato complex, , has a linear structure.
How do we know that? And can you supply a reference? Please ping me. Eric Kvaalen (talk) 11:25, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The structure is illustrated on table 8.9, p.325 (2nd. edition) of Greenwood & Earnshaw "Chemistry of the Elements". Petergans (talk) 08:28, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the reference. I managed to find it online. The answer to my question of how we know, is that somebody did X-ray crystallography of [] []. But the same table also says that there exists a ring, consisting of the string of atoms -Ni-OCN-Ni-OCN- curled into a ring, in which the Ni-N-C part is bent. I'm surprised that the  anion is linear, because naïvely I would say that each nitrogen atom had a lone pair of electrons. Eric Kvaalen (talk) 11:59, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Many years ago we postulated, on the basis of Raman spectroscopy data, that the ligand ammonia forms the linear complex [Ag(NH3)2]+ in aqueous ammonia solution but the tetrahedral complex [Ag(NH3)4]+ in liquid ammonia solution (at ambient temperature, in a sealed tube). (J.C.S.Chem. Comm. 1973, p.914) I understand from this that both enthalpy and entropy terms are critical in determinig which structure is formed : with aqueous ammonia as solvent the Gibbs free energy of dissociation for [Ag(NH3)4]+ → [AgNH3)2]+ + 2NH3 is favourable, but it is unfavourable when the solvent is liquid ammonia. Petergans (talk) 18:03, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Silver cyanato complex
Talk:Ferricyanide

message: RE acid lability of Cyanide? Ferricyanide is quite stable in strong acids. I've done some Lab procedures that use Ferricyanide as a Cyanide source in Alkaline media (Sodium Hydroxide) for conversion of Carbonyl groups to alpha Hydroxy Carboxylic Acids. Consider [Fe][CN] ~ 10^27 but [Fe][OH] ~ 10^34 (its in the Chemical Rubber Handbook but apparently not quotable here), hence the decomposition of Ferricyanide in Alkaline conditions is strongly kinetically favored. 2001:4898:80E8:ED31:0:0:0:2 (talk) 06:50, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dissociation constant would be nice
Talk:Kalamaria

message: "Carrying on a tradition of being a place of recreation and excursion, Kalamaria has become a place of increased tourist activity. This has resulted in bringing the residents of Thessaloniki together for entertainment and relaxation." This reads like a tourist guide, not an encyclopedia.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.44.210.3 (talk) 07:23, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Han purple and Han blue

message: Obviously, there is no question that Chinese Blue should be merged into Han Purple since both articles are about the same pigment.  I'm going to do it right now.  Keraunos 04:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not true, that Han purple is blue with Cu2O particles. Recently I started to prepare Han Purple (heating of a stoichiometric mixture of SiO2, Cu and CaCO3 with a little borax at 900 °C). It is not finished yet but the product contains blue and purple crystals now, and I hope the blue ones will change to purple ones... --FK1954 (talk) 09:23, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I can point you to my phD thesis available on researchgate: I did it without borax..it worked. the trick is to repeat the process of baking seversal times with wet milling steps. to increase the distribution of each. 213.193.109.182 (talk) 14:31, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging Chinese Blue into Han Purple

message: I see in the above post that it was merged quite some time ago, but to me that does not really make sense.  I would suggest to split these two 'compounds' and use the data separately and appropriately.  --Dirk Beetstra T C 13:47, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Split 

message: Why does it talk about the red copper(I) oxide, while in the formula it gives the CuO, which is copper(II) oxide? --Chemicalinterest (talk) 15:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Color of Han purple 

message: The singular reliance on outdated view of only the Silk Road being the path of contact/trade between East and West needs to be updated to include the heavy ocean trade in both Pacific and Atlantic (see Barry Fell where in American BC he uses experts to decode ancient writings across the America's to prove such extensive trade 2,000 BC to 800 AD). And to the theories of China invention e.g. of blue/purples needs to be added this better understanding of that widespread non silk road contact via trans ocean trading. Recall also the ceramic blue cooking balls along the US SE coasts, of Egyptian origin using
? Egyptian blue glazes (? dated to ? 2,000-1,500 BC) traded to US West coast and carried across Pacific to China. And add'l comparison is the bronze Greek astrolabe of 500 BC (with approx 50 moveable geers and ab foot tall, a GPS from ancient times-only later "copied" in China with 20 foot tall wooden version approx 1,400 AD) - Addin Scio 2 Drivil 69.121.221.97 (talk) 10:11, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Add Ocean trade to Silk Road

message: Surely Han purple is a violet hue? - often refered to as purple...
149.142.201.253 (talk) 18:25, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  the name of the hue
Talk:Hexafluorophosphoric acid

message: Does anyone know what this compound looks like structurally? I'm guessing it's a central phosphorous with the flourines arranged octahedrally around it, but I have no clue if that's correct. I was hoping to find a bonding structure/CPK model, like are shown on the info box for Phosphoric acid. -- 140.142.20.229 (talk) 02:25, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structure? 

message: Like many related species (chloroplatinic acid, fluoroantimonic acid, ..) there is not a single compound here.  --Smokefoot (talk) 15:56, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: It is not really a single compound...
Talk:Brodiaeoideae

message: When the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group published APG II, they recommended that Cabombaceae and Nymphaeaceae be combined into one family. This did not go over well, and they reversed themselves for APG III. The same thing might happen with the amalgamation of 7 families to form an expanded Asparagaceae. Only time will tell. I believe that if the new classification is generally accepted, a new article entitled "Brodiaeoideae" should be created for the information that is here at "Themidaceae". 128.171.106.250 (talk) 23:18, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wait and see
Talk:Hydrogen telluride

message: OOps! somehow wrecked box by deleting related compoud and line break and have no idea how. please fix if you know how to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DCH29 (talk • contribs) 16:06, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Was fixed in short order . DMacks (talk) 05:13, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help fix my mistake