Talk:Vegetable ivory

I would propose merging this with the article on Phytelephas aequatorialis - the tree and its product are so inextricably linked that separating them seems counterproductive. The lifted lorax (talk) 19:05, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and take in tagua nut too. Johnbod (talk) 19:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. All three articles should be combined into Phytelephas aequatorialis. Wilhelm meis (talk) 00:05, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly oppose this merger, since the Taqua nut is not the only source of material called "vegetable ivory".

Further, for the sake of argument, if the merger made sense, I would question whether the article should be under the botanical name, which only botanists would recognize.

Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 03:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not? What else is used for "vegetable ivory"? Yes, I think it makes sense to retain the article under the botanical name, and of course informal names, including Tagua, Tagua nut, and Vegetable ivory would be redirected to that page. Wilhelm meis (talk) 23:21, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also "Phytelephas macrocarpa" according to the article. Johnbod (talk) 00:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, so I see. But then, Phytelephas Macrocarpa doesn't have an article of its own. If P. Aequatorialis is the primary source of vegetable ivory, I think this is still a workable solution. Wilhelm meis (talk) 00:58, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nearest I can tell, vegetable ivory is derived from the nuts of any species within the Phytelephas genus. Are all the trees within the genus known as "Tagua Palm"? Perhaps we should leave Phytelephas aequatorialis alone and instead take Tagua nut and Vegetable ivory into Phytelephas. Any thoughts? Wilhelm meis (talk) 16:00, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to http://waynesword.palomar.edu/pljan99.htm, Metroxylon species and Hyphaene are also used as vegetable ivories. There was an image of a souvenier from Namibia on the Phytelephas page that I took out; the image source labeled it as being made from vegetable ivory, but the caption on the Phytelephas page listed it as being made from "tagua". I doubt it was made from Phytelephas; I suspect Hyphaene. Vegetable ivory should have its own article.70.246.208.52 (talk) 00:17, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another source for additional genera of vegetable ivories here: http://www.palms.org/principes/1997/palmivory.htm. I have no idea how to do much with unmerging and changing redirects, but I think the existing situation should be changed. Vegetable ivory is not synonymous with Phytelephas.70.246.208.52 (talk) 00:20, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]