Talk:List of Grevillea cultivars

message: I've reinstated the superb image.  I hope people don't mind.  I did this because images all on one page is a really useful resource for trying to identify a plant from a sample.  Once the page has more pictures I would even suggest converting the list into an image gallery (using the <gallery> tag). John Dalton 05:20, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: OK - given there is a lack of photos probably doesn't matter at the moment, but I have found that galleries seem to be discouraged on many pages and that it is better to link to Wikipedia commons. Currently given there is a big long list it does make the page look nice having images down the RHS. Cas Liber 05:39, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess it could also be said that identification is potentially a job for wikispecies rather than wikipedia.  Unfortunately wikispecies doesn't seem to have a path for identifying something.  Maybe it is a gap for wikipedia to fill, even if it is a temporary measure? If you already know what it is you can get more information on it from wikispecies, but it doesn't seem to be good for answering the question "What plant is that?".  I've sometimes thought a good application for a wiki would be for a bunch of knowledgeable people to write an expert system whereby you start at the main page of a wiki and each page contains a multiple choice question.  Each answer links to another question page and so on until a page is reached which it its wikispecies entry.  It might even be an application for a wiki version of the semantic web.  Do any plant people here know whether such a thing already exists on the web? John Dalton 07:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are published books with professional keys in them for flora in various parts of Australia. Part of the Flora of Australia series may have a Key attached to it too. It is a good idea, not sure how it would go with intellectual property etc. Cas Liber 08:06, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  There's the beginnings of an interactive identification key at wikibooks. An example of a more layman-friendly approach for a limited flora can be seen here . Photographs certainly help.--Melburnian 12:22, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, I was thinking the same--Melburnian 06:29, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks like it's unanimous. ;-) I was about to move it but I notice you're working on it right now. I don't want to EC you. Perhaps you can move it when next convenient? Hesperian 12:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: ... on second thoughts I'll check that Cas is aware of this discussion. Hesperian 12:09, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, indeed. We still need a backgrounder on Grevillea cultivars in general, though this can perhaps be incorporated in the main Grevillea article.--Melburnian 13:42, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah - happy to move it too. The preamble is not going to be very long anyway.cheers,  Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:41, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reinstated image

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Grevillea cultivars. 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/20070927172121/http://asgap.org.au/ASGAP/grev57.pdf to http://asgap.org.au/ASGAP/grev57.pdf
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) 03:04, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified