Talk:Laurisilva

This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Portugal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Portugal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PortugalWikipedia:WikiProject PortugalTemplate:WikiProject PortugalPortugal articles

Portugal To-do:

Find correct name The airport is not listed as João Paulo II anywhere. The airport's own website calls itself simply Ponta Delgada, and has no mention of João Paulo.

Improve key articles to Good article

Improve

Review

Category:History of Portugal: lots to remove there
Template:Regions of Portugal: statistical (NUTS3) subregions and intercommunal entities are confused; they are not the same in all regions, and should be sublisted separately in each region: intermunicipal entities are sometimes larger and split by subregions (e.g. the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon has two subregions), some intercommunal entities are containing only parts of subregions. All subregions should be listed explicitly and not assume they are only intermunicipal entities (which accessorily are not statistic subdivisions but real administrative entities, so they should be listed below, probably using a smaller font: we can safely eliminate the subgrouping by type of intermunicipal entity from this box).

Requests

See Requested articles

Assess

Help assessing articles.

Need images

Translate from Portuguese Wikipedia

Wikify

Vote:

Watch this list — Edit this list

Noted

it should be noted that it is also common on the island la Palma, although I don't have exact figures. It sweeps the right altitude zones and barrancos from the region around El Tablado, eastward towards Los Sauces and from here southwards towards the Cumbre Nuevo Nepenthes 15:44, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The Canary Islands, of which la Palma is one, are already mentioned several times. Even la Palma itself is already specifically discussed. --House of Scandal 16:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing things

We are confusing two things, the type of forest and a concrete forest. Laurisilva forest from Madeira is only one of the several laurisilva forest so when appear "Laurisilva of Madeira as inscribed on the World heritage" we are confusing to the people, this one is the article about all laurisilva forests. regards --Bentaguayre (talk) 16:37, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Laurissilva didn´t disappeared from the mediterranean basin, because the weather turned warmer, but because the temperatures turned too cold on winter and the climate as is mentioned correctly on wikipedia turned also drier.

So there are some changes that need to be done. If what is placed on this page were correct then we had several laurissilva on all wet mountains of Greece, Italy, Cyprus and Turkey, which of course is not true. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.174.37.208 (talk) 02:54, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There´s not confusion at all. Madeira has the biggest continuous laurissilva forest of the world. It was given World Heritage Title to Madeira. Even if some other places do have also laurissilva forest, that don´t change nothing. Madeira will still hold the World Heritage title ( it doesn´t mean that other places are less important, they can candidate also for that title). Nature of all countries belong to all the world. You should be happy to know that Madeira has a forest that belongs also to YOU.

Well, I would say that mountains of Turkey,Greece and Italy do have a quite cold winter for laurissilva ( even many lowlands). So this page is giving correct information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.174.37.202 (talk) 21:11, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So who´s putting that the laurissilva is a mild temperate forest, care to post your reasons here? Trees, which have long sized leaves and which don´t lose them on the winter, are a subtropical to tropical types of trees, not of temperate type. If not you would have many laurissilvas in continental Europe, which is not true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.80.191 (talk) 19:03, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is widely realised that the article needs attention, but it is important to remember that the situation concerning palaeontological and ecological considerations is not simple. Beware for example of categorisations such as: "Trees, which have long sized leaves and which don´t lose them on the winter, are a subtropical to tropical types of trees, not of temperate type." That is simplistic. For a start, trees in regions of heavy rainfall will commonly have such leaves, even in temperate zones, such as in parts of South America, Australasia and Southern Africa. Sometimes these are invaders or descendents of plants from earlier climates, but that suffered no special selective burden from their leaf shape, which incidentally can be as important for shedding wind as water. Consider a few hundred spp of Eucalyptus for starters. Then again, you speak of continental Europe, which generally is cold temperate or Mediterranean and fairly dry, sometimes arid. There is quite a wide range from warm temperate to cold temperate climte, after all! I am not taking any special position here, but prediction of the spread of forest on the basis of climate is a chancy thing at best. In general, we would do well to examine any generalisations we make (apart from this one of course) with care. JonRichfield (talk) 10:31, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article needs attention now. As it stands, it is misleading. Misleading components should be removed, now, before another generation of students is mislead. Unsourced statements should be deleted because it is far better to have a small article than a misleading one. Nadiatalent (talk) 13:31, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mr JonRicjfield.

You are giving examples of exceptions, so you are giving me reason. The general rule is: big sized leaves present year round = warm climate (it can be subtropical or tropical). Now if some survive climate changes or not, that´s another matter.

With Continental Europe I meant the European mainland (continent). And I´m not predicting any climate changes, I just talked about known facts, which are: Laurel forests aren´t common in the European mainland. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.242.6.240 (talk) 01:14, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

I would like to merge this articles into the very similar article under the English name Laurel forest. There is no reason that Laurisilva couldn't be adequately discussed on that page as a subsection. Both pages, as they currently stand, need extensive trimming to remove duplication and unsourced statements. Nadiatalent (talk) 13:34, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is reasonable. There is no obvious devaluation of the topic implied by merging. In fact, it could lead to improvement. I certainly have made additions to one of the articles and later discovered that either all the information was in the other article, or that because it was not, there was a gap which could mislead a reader of one article only. I suggest that we give it a month or two of thinking hard about why NOT to merge, then proceed if nothing turns up. Of course, there still should be a redir for people searching for the name Laurisilva (I had never heard of it before encountering it here.) JonRichfield (talk) 18:00, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'll make Laurisilva into a redirect to here, and if there is anything of value there that isn't duplicated here, it can be retrieved from the page history. After searching, I'm sure that Laurisilva is a word borrowed from another language. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 01:08, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify the above, Laurisilva is now a redirect to Laurel forest. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 21:42, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]