Wikipedia:Naming conventions (flora)

Policy page Wikipedia:Naming conventions

The naming conventions that apply to flora have been extensively discussed and continue to be discussed on the WikiProject Plants talk page

Article title

The naming of flora articles has special difficulties, but is in general compatible with naming policy and the standard Tree of Life project.

General guidance

See WP:NAME, WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRECISION

The naming policy states use the most easily recognized name. Where a commonly used English name and a scientific name are not the same, the commonly used English should be used for an article name in preference to the scientific name, providing the name is used widely and is unambiguous.

Specific guidance

It is rare for the common (i.e. vernacular) name of a plant taxon to be unambiguous: many taxa bear several English common names, and many English common names are applied to multiple unrelated taxa. In the first case, no common name is common in the "broadly used" sense, although the scientific name may be. In the second case, the common name is ambiguous, so the use of scientific names is necessary in the interests of sufficient precision. The majority of plant taxon articles are therefore best titled with their scientific names (with redirects or disambiguation entries from the common names).

However, the common name of a taxon should be used for the article title if it is the only prominent English common name for the taxon (spelling variations excepted); it is more common (i.e. more broadly used) than the scientific name; it is unambiguous as the name of the taxon; and it is widely attested in reliable secondary sources (without the scientific name) in reference to the entire taxon as commonly circumscribed. Cases where these conditions are likely to be met include:

1. Widely known genera and higher rank taxa; e.g. Maple, not Acer (genus).
2. Plant taxa that are commonly named after a plant product of which they are the source; e.g. coffee, rice. So long as a single article treats both plant taxon and plant product, the article should be named after the product. Ideally, though, these articles should eventually be split, with the plant taxon article to be entitled with the scientific name; e.g. Coffea, Oryza sativa. Note that this does not apply when multiple plant products stem from the same plant taxon; e.g. brussels sprouts, cabbage and broccoli. In such cases, a separate article on the plant taxon is necessary; e.g. Brassica oleracea.

Common names should also be used for groups that are not taxonomically sound, even if they were previously thought to be. For example, the dicotyledons are no longer recognised as a valid taxon, so it is inappropriate to address that group by a scientific name.

Where the boundaries of the common name are vague (e.g. grass), separate articles on the common noun and the taxon (Poaceae) may be helpful.

When treating monotypic taxa, it is often appropriate to treat the various ranks in a single article. If an article treats both a monospecific genus and its species, the article should be named after the genus, with the species name as a redirect. If an article treats both a monogeneric family and its genus, the article should still be at the genus name, as that is more likely to be commonly recognised.

See also

• Tree of Life naming convention
• Plant naming convention discussion