Talk:Grammatophyllum speciosum

giant orchid

The sentence about the root bundles should be worked into either one of the existing, or a new paragaraph. D Erikson 05:44, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done JoJan 12:31, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved to Grammatophyllum speciosum. Favonian (talk) 17:55, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Giant Orchid → Grammatophyllum speciosum – Raabbustamante (talk) 15:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Article naming for flora articles differs from standard Tree of Life guideline in the following ways:

Scientific names are to be used as page titles in all cases except the following, as determined on a case-by-case basis through discussion on the WikiProject Plants talk page:

Agricultural and horticultural cases in which multiple different products stem from the same species (eg. brussel sprouts, cabbage & broccoli). In such a case, a separate page with the botanical description of the entire species is preferred (eg. Brassica oleracea).

Plants which are economically or culturally significant enough to merit their own page, using the common name as a title, describing their use. Example: Coffee. (A) separate page(s) with the botanical description(s) of the taxa involved, using the scientific name, is preferred.

Where a genus is monospecific (has only a single species), the article should be named after the genus, with the species name as a redirect. If a family contains only one genus, the article should still be at the genus name, as that is more likely to be commonly recognised.

the article Giant Orchid is mis labeled as such , the title should be grammatophyllum speciousum.other orchid with common name of giant orchid are Pteroglossaspis ecristata Barlia robertiana — Raabbustamante (talk) 06:31, 27 February 2012‎ (UTC)[reply]

Comment what is the WP:COMMONNAME ? TOL guidelines are to be used when there is no WP:UCN. I notice several vernacular names listed, if none of these are prominent over the others, then the scientific name could be used, if one of them is prominent, then that one should be used, unless there's some regional bias. 70.24.251.71 (talk) 20:46, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support move, per WP:NC_(flora). Guettarda (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:FLORA. Even though one would expect more hits for the general term "giant orchid" the species name provides more hits in reliable sources found in Google Books and Google Scholar. Therefore, the WP:COMMONNAME is the scientific name. Rkitko ^(talk) 03:42, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

= is a false arguement because there are two other orchid species , namely Giant orchid Pteroglossaspis ecristata (Fernald) Rolfe [3] [4]

and Giant Orchid Barlia robertiana therefor this article should be moved to its own unique entry under Gramatophyllum speciosum as there are no other plant species names as gramatophyllum speciosumRaabbustamante (talk)

But the guideline dictates that the article should follow the wikified template and should be under Grammatophyllum speciosum Rather than under Giant orchid, which is contentious because two other species of orchids claim that common name, with the spanish species is more often refered to as such and gramatophyllum speciousum is commonly called "Cane orchid"

the article does not follow the template for orchid species Raabbustamante (talk) 06:19, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Um, I agree with you. I'm not sure what you mean by "false arguement [sic]." I'd like to see the article moved to Grammatophyllum speciosum. Rkitko ^(talk) 21:27, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Grammatophyllum speciosum. 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/20101225112616/http://www.aos.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Orchids_Magazine&CONTENTID=6061&TEMPLATE=%2FCM%2FContentDisplay.cfm to http://www.aos.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=orchids_magazine&CONTENTID=6061&TEMPLATE=%2FCM%2FContentDisplay.cfm

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) 07:50, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]