Talk:Cylindropuntia fulgida

Merger?

There is a very large amount of overlap between this article and the article on the Opuntia ficus-indica, the primary edible species. One resolution would be to merge them, but it might be preferable to move the content concerning the edible plant and its fruit into the other article. Liam Proven (talk) 22:37, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? What overlap? They are completely different plants. Stan (talk) 19:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? Cylindropuntia is a distant relative of Opuntia. Opuntia ficus-indica is a totally different type of cactus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.19.167.108 (talk) 07:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Picture

I am fairly certain that the picture on this page is of a Teddy-bear Cholla. It has much finer spines than the Jumping Cholla. Please compare the pictures on this page, the wikipedia article on Teddy-bear Cholla, and the pictures on this external link [1] 68.84.206.80 23:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right. I removed the pic, along with the accuracy tag. If there was something else in the article you thought was inaccurate, feel free to replace it. But that was definitely a TB Cholla. Jumping Chollas have thinner and longer branches. --DanielCD 23:27, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Values are Inconsistent

I don't know the original values but the conversions between metres and feet are incorrect. For example 300-1000m is ~980-3300ft, 4m is ~13ft, 2-3cm is ~0.8-1.2inches. However as I said I don't know which are the original values. The conversions are definitely off though. 124.148.206.193 (talk) 12:46, 24 April 2012 (UTC)LogiC[reply]

inconsistent measurement units

The Description section needs to have the SI units and imperical units swapped around (SI put in the parentheses and imperical in the sentence proper).

Reasoning: this article is about a plant that is primarily a plant in the USA, and in the lede units are given in square miles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.82.68.160 (talk) 12:28, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Debate over content is live on the entry

Under "Description," the article reads:

While the name "jumping cholla" is applied especially to this species, it is also used as a general term for all chollas. (who says that? only Cylindropuntia fulgida, and sometimes Cylindropuntia bigelovii are called jumping cholla)

Blandcrowder (talk) 16:59, 18 January 2013 (UTC)Bland Crowder[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cylindropuntia fulgida. 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/20090606021357/http://www.delange.org/JumpingCactus/JumpingCactus.htm to http://www.delange.org/JumpingCactus/JumpingCactus.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:28, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]