Talk:Botrychium: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
m moved Talk:Moonwort to Talk:Botrychium: consistency in naming |
|||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
==This needs a complete revision== |
==This needs a complete revision== |
||
Is the separation of the grapeferns tenable? I think the latest word is "certainly not"... in any case species need to be reviewed and ''[[Botrypus]]'' is one hell of a mess. [[User:Dysmorodrepanis|Dysmorodrepanis]] 00:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC) |
Is the separation of the grapeferns tenable? I think the latest word is "certainly not"... in any case species need to be reviewed and ''[[Botrypus]]'' is one hell of a mess. [[User:Dysmorodrepanis|Dysmorodrepanis]] 00:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC) |
||
:I think the consensus at the Plant project is that it is at least reasonable to have a page for every genus level, though not necessarily for every species levels. I'm doing an undergraduate research project on ''Botrychiums'' this year so I'll try to get some more sources added when I come across their journal articles. [[User:Ataylor18|Ataylor18]] ([[User talk:Ataylor18|talk]]) 01:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:30, 7 October 2011
Please add
{{WikiProject banner shell}}
to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.![]() | Plants Stub‑class | |||||||||
|
This needs a complete revision
Is the separation of the grapeferns tenable? I think the latest word is "certainly not"... in any case species need to be reviewed and Botrypus is one hell of a mess. Dysmorodrepanis 00:55, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think the consensus at the Plant project is that it is at least reasonable to have a page for every genus level, though not necessarily for every species levels. I'm doing an undergraduate research project on Botrychiums this year so I'll try to get some more sources added when I come across their journal articles. Ataylor18 (talk) 01:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC)