[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/Jump to content

Talk:Banksia telmatiaea

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleBanksia telmatiaea is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 12, 2018.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 17, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted


Untitled

[edit]

Previous discussion archived to Talk:Banksia telmatiaea/archive

Re-examination

[edit]

Looked this over as an old FA that has not been TFA. I see a few possible improvements, but nothing that should require pulling FA status. I compared this with the more recent FA Banksia aquilonia.

General comments:

  • Plant description is rather short, in comparison: there's no description of the foliage and bark in this species.
can't find anything on bark. scouring for bits and peices now - found a bit but need to sleep! more later Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:52, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • What makes this distinct from B. sphaerocarpa? A direct comparison of the two, and an explanation of why George chose to separate this species, would be a good addition to the Distribution section.
added a bit. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:51, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the Taxonomy section, can we include a reference to the common names to get the inline citation out of the lead?

moved now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:09, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Prose quibbles:

  • In the lead: "not published as a species"; I feel that "not described as a separate species" would sound better.
agreed - done. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:09, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • In "Description": "may be embedded with"; I find the use of "embedded with" jarring, as I'm only used to seeing the preposition "in" coupled with that verb. I might say something like "Up to 70 woody follicles, each of which...may be embedded in the cone."
tweaked. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:51, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • In "Ecology": "the Lichmera indistincta"; drop the definite article. Idiomatically, I feel that it would be OK preceding the common name but not the scientific name. "species of Xyloricta"; can we say "species of the moth Xyloricta"? Clearer for the reader not familiar with banksia-eating insects. "this unusual nectar...attributed it to"; I would say "attributed its transformation to". It's the change in the nectar that's being attributed to cyanobacteria, not the nectar itself. "normal nectar sugar compositions"; I would say "a normal nectar sugar composition, albeit dominated by sucrose".
sounds good - done. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:26, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Choess (talk) 16:42, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Banksia telmatiaea/comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
==intro==
  • Consider having the lead image adjusted a bit: it's washed out, and the small thumb size doesn't help.
  • many of of the Abietinae
  • Reformulate. Such a formulation is usually used above genus level. make sure to mention "series"  Done

Description

  • Why is it relevant to mention lignotubers? Do most Banksia species have them? it is an important distinction in bushfire-prone country; woody plants either regenerate from seed or by resprouting from a woody lignotuber after bushfire so this disticntion is noted in all ausie dry country woody plants if knowncheers, Cas Liber talk contribs 03:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • The "and proteoid roots with no lignotuber" was added to the description section as an afterthought; I've removed it again, as it gets ample coverage in the ecology section, and Circeus' question indicates that we're just going to confuse people unless we give the context. Hesperian 05:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • A close up showing both flowers and leaves would do great in this section. There doesn,t seem to be any close up showing leaves.
  • made up of hundreds of pairs of flowers
    • Reformulate to remove at least one "of"  Done
      • I culled this a bit - I want to avoid implying that flower spikes are typical or characteristic of Banksia, since the Dryandra transfer makes this not at all the case. Hesperian 05:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'a spiral around a woody axis'
    • around → surrounding  Done
      • removed altogether; the spiral arrangement is pretty much invisible in this species. Sure, the bracts on the rachis have a helical arrangement, but that seems to be getting altogether too technical for this article. Hesperian 05:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • The flowers have a color, the flower spike doesn't ..tricky this, it has an overall hue made up of composite colours
  • five centimetres (1–2 in),  Done
    • That should be a stop, not a comma.
  • consists of tubular perianth  Done
    • consist of a...
  • also been observed in November.  Done
  • It's possibly a good idea to mention why exactly "80% of fruiting structures set no seed." Looks like it,s because if the specific requirements for seed release.
  • Seed develops within a year.
  • Do something about that gallery. Just because we can have them doesn't mean we should.
    • Point taken. People don't like galleries because people rightly associate galleries with gratuitous overuse of images. But in this case, all those images are highly relevant to the description section, and the description section is better for them. A gallery seemed like a sensible way of marking them up. But the outcry has been strident and unanimous, so I shall learn my lesson and never use a gallery ever again. ;-) Hesperian 05:43, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • I went ahead and placed the two most relevant images on the right. Doesn't seem necessary to place a burned fruit image here, since there is one in the most relevant place ("ecology") already, and a normal fruit too.Circeus 06:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • Having moved the map right too, we're looking a bit right-heavy now. I don't think we've found the final resting place for these images yet. Hesperian 08:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
          • I personally don't have a problem with the new configuration, but I won't oppose if you place it back on the left. Maybe we could switch around the flower images from "Description" and "Taxonomy" since the one in "Taxonomy" is less tall? Circeus 17:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonomy

Have I ever said how much I like these sections?

  • Banksia aff. Sphaerocarpa.
  • I think it would be proper to give the specimen number for the type. The idea was suggested for Verbascum thapsus and I think it's pertinent.
  • George placed B. telmatiaea in subgenus Banksia because its inflorescence is a typical Banksia flower spike; section Oncostylis because it has hooked styles; and series Abietinae because its inflorescence is roughly spherical.
    • Use commas instead of semicolons.  Done
  • but placed B. scabrella (Burma Road Banksia) between B. telmatiaea and B. leptophylla.
  • Does subg. Spathulatae have any subdivisions? (not yet -Austin and Kevin didn't get that far)

Distribution and habitat

Ecology

  • First paragraph lacks a reference
  • solubilisation of nutrients
    • Now you've lost me completely. And the next phrase is not actually helping.
    • Oh, and replace "these" with "they" or "this type of roots"
  • Maybe a quick mention that Apis mellifera is an introduction to Australia? (if it is, obviously)
  • but their involvement in pollination is assured
  • the strong, musky odour; the occurrence of inflorescences hidden within the foliage close to the ground; the large amounts of nectar produced; and the pattern of nectar production, which peaks at dawn and dusk.
  • seed attrition
  • and eventually becoming "an almost black, gelatinous lump adhering to the base of the flowers".
    • Double check whether position of punctuation within quotes is variety-dependant or not. I'm not sure it is.
    • Consider better integrating that sentence in the next, so that it is specifically mentioned that Byron is being quoted.
  • As of 2007, the cause remains unknown.

Conservation  Done

Last edited at 01:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 08:56, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Banksia telmatiaea. 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) 21:16, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]