Talk:Heterotheca hartmanii

Additional information

There is still lots of information in the primary source. There is a full botanical description that needs to be translated into plain English for non-experts. There are also excellent pictures of herbarium specimens that might be tracked down to a public source for commons. I'm not abandoning this page, but I'm going to be adding to it for at least the next week. Please do not give it a rating before October 12. Need to figure out how to reference that this is not yet evaluated by NatureServe as of 2023. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 19:53, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@MtBotany:, OK, I'm leaving the class rating blank for now. But there is nothing wrong with expanding an article that has a rating and then changing the rating yourself. If you prefer that somebody else reassess the expanded article, you can just blank the rating (but it might be a couple weeks before it gets re-rated if you go that route).

Proving a negative (i.e. that a species has not been evaluated for a conservation status) is often not feasible. Presumably NatureServe would currently consider H. hartmanii to be included within another species (perhaps H. fulcrata or H. pedunculata). Unless NatureServe publishes an announcement along the lines of "here are some recently described species which we intend to evaluate soon" there may not be anything you can reference. Plantdrew (talk) 01:09, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly my problem, the prove the negative thing. It is such a newly described species that they don't even list it as a synonym of something else. I'm poking around looking to see if I can get their database to cough up a list of everything they consider valid for the genus. Or possibly making a custom data request. No idea if they would consider a request from a random Wikipedia Editor but the worst they can say is "No". 🌿MtBotany (talk) 03:31, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]