Jump to content

Talk:List of Asteraceae genera

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Mispelled genera?

[edit]

I have included in this list some genera included in the category Category:Asteraceae genera, but I have doubts if they are mispelling of other genera, an expert should revise these pairs of articles:

Flakinho (talk) 21:05, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above pairs have been dealt with. (Two deletions after merge, and one redirect (orthographic variant used in recent thesis) after merge). Lavateraguy (talk) 18:46, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Asteraceae genera. 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:

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) 04:57, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Asteraceae genera. 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:

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) 11:04, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Needs maintenance

[edit]

The list needs a full comparison to POWO, explanation that the list comes from POWO, and a POWO citation; needs As of template once this is completed. POWO currently lists 1,688 accepted genera in the family. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) (talk) 23:00, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I through Z have been updated from POWO. A through H in progress. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) (talk) 07:07, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
F through H completed. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) (talk) 08:55, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
D and E completed. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) (talk) 09:39, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A through C updated from POWO. Entire list has the 1,688 genera listed as accepted in POWO and no other; no synonyms or obsolete genera listed. Further maintenance is needed, however, including citing sources for all the common names (or removing the common names?). Furthermore, maintenance needs to be performed on any genera articles removed from this list today to make sure those wikilinks are redirecting properly. – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) (talk) 12:17, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Eewilson:, thank you for tackling this. I worked on implementing automatic taxoboxes for Asteraceae last year, following the subfamily/tribal classification of the Global Compositae Database (GCD uses the APHIA database platform of WoRMS, so taxonbar links to WoRMS can be used to see GCD records). There is some disagreement between POWO and GCD over recognition of genera (which is bound to be the case for any large databases). Lists of genera in articles for Asteraceae subfamilies and tribes follow GCD. As POWO doesn't give infrafamilial placement, I don't think it is really feasible to completely reconcile this list with the lists of genera in tribe articles (but I approve of following POWO for this list). Plantdrew (talk) 22:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Plantdrew, yes I think that makes sense. Thanks! – Elizabeth (Eewilson) (tag or ping me) (talk) 14:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Asteraceae_genera&oldid=1203621850"