Talk:Persoonia

Plants Mid‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia: Biota Low‑importance

	Australia portal Persoonia is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

earlier comments

more to go but I'm stuffed...sleep time Cas Liber 15:32, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great stuff. Your pers. comm. ref didn't have a year so I inserted 2006. Snottygobble 00:48, 27 May 2006 (UTC

thanks for that - had another idea. I can link it to Peter's personal webpage at Royal Botanic Gardens Sydney (which I will do next time I'm on broadband at home/work)Cas Liber 06:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is Acidonia doing in here?

The article starts out by describing Persoonia as a genus and then goes into a spiel about the Persoonioideae (whatever the hell that is. Family? Sub-family?) and the genera Placospermum and Acidonia then references the species acilualris with no genus at all. Totally mystifying. Has the taxonomy of Persoonia recently undergone a major revision? And if so why are Acidonia and Placospermum in an article on Persoonia?

If this is intended to be an article on Persoonia as the title says then remove references to genera other than Persoonia and start a new article on Persoonioideae.

If it intended as an article on Persoonidae then retitle it, clarify what that taxon is and what genera it encompasses as well as clarifying the numerous P. spp references which may now presumably be either Persoonia or Placospermum

As it is the article is neither fish nor fowl, just a confusing mess.Ethel Aardvark

Thankyou for your constructive criticism. I will look at addressing that. cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 09:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. Good job. Ethel Aardvark

Geebungs are Australian endemics?

To quote Flannery in "The Future Eaters": "Geebungs (Genus Persoonia) so common in eastern Australia, also grow in New Zealand."

Anyone care to comment. Hard to imagine Flannery making a mistake of this kind. Have the NZ species been re-designated to another genus in the past 10 years?

Thanks for that. I checked Weston (1995), and it describes Persoonia as "a genus of 98 species, all endemic in Australia." However, the Flora of New Zealand (1982) online database contains a listing for the genus, describing it as "shrubs or small trees; about 60 spp. of Australia and 1 endemic to N.Z". It lists species Persoonia toru as endemic to New Zealand. However, according to the IPNI online database, Persoonia toru was broken out into its own monospecific genus Toronia (i.e. Toronia toru) in 1975.

On the basis of this, I think we can assume that Flannery has succumbed to confusion about Toronia and got it wrong.

Snottygobble 12:25, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for checking that. Sounds like this is one of those taxa where the lumpers and splitters are going at it hammer and tongs. I'm happy enough to leave it as is, but would suggest a comment to the effect of "a closely related genus (Toronia) is found in NZ and is included within the genus Persoonia by some authors"? I leave the final decision in your hands. 211.29.68.194 21:49, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, done Cas Liber 06:24, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonomy needs updating

The important species (because of its EPBC listing as CR) Persoonia pauciflora needs to be added to the lists here - but where? (Perhaps near P. isophylla which it resembles.) I do not have access to the Australian Plants 2003 reference which I assume includes this species. Hoping somebody else might. Gderrin (talk) 11:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll dig it up soon. I have that AP as I nagged Peter Weston into doing something for that issue and helped compile the articles...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updated now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:49, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alphabetical order

It is difficult for casual readers to find an article about a species of Persoonia from this page. Seems that it has evolved from a much earlier version which had no links. It would be better to have the species listed alphabetically, perhaps with the rather cumbersome "Persoonia nav" template at the bottom. Waiting for some feedback before making the change. Gderrin (talk) 06:29, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also the headings in the species list "Rufiflora" etc. have little or no meaning because they are not explained. Gderrin (talk) 03:38, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My feeling is that control-F is the casual readers' friend here. And that the natural subgeneric relationships are good to highlight. Agree there needs to be some explanation of the groups. I can dig up and add. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 15:33, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]