Jump to content

Talk:Euphorbia cupularis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Umdhlebi)

Existence

[edit]

I had a good look, but wasn't able to find much evidence at all that this plant exists, not even as a cryptid. Most of the information about it is in German, ad what little there is apears to originate from the same source material (similar word usage etc).

The article is here, and I'm not going to post it for deletion, but I would question whether it is notable enough to have its own page, and whether any information about it can pass WP:R

perfectblue 16:03, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to a translated version of one of the German pages [1], the Umdhlebi was originally described in a November 2, 1882 issue of Nature. I think that's a start. Zagalejo 14:55, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I read it, but I found almost notihn about it in English, and I would like a secondary source to confirm it as that page doesn't really count as WP:RS.

perfectblue 15:31, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Erm... The link is translated. I went there and it was all right. Zheliel (I know I am Pro) 23:55, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is a real example of a botanical crptid (as in crypto-botany). It seems to me that the person who wrote about it believed it to exist. The man-eating tree is a hoax. The sheep-bearing plant is explained by various misunderstandings and legends, and is known not to exist. The category of crypto-botany should be the equivalent of the crypto-zoology category. 72.177.123.145 (talk) 23:05, 10 April 2013 (UTC)Eric[reply]


I've fleshed this out a lot- I found a a response to Parker's letter and a work from twelve years earlier that contains more stories of this thing. The link to Schneider's article is dead and I can't find an archived copy, but I've left the citation in there in case someone else wants to have a go at tracking it down- it might be in one of the back-issues of 'Der Fährtenleser'. I've also [citation needed] a couple claims that aren't in Parker or Callaway but that I think must've come from Schneider- the one about the fruit growing on rods and the one about the plant being fertilized by the bodies of its victims. 24.209.35.117 (talk) 21:16, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]