Talk:Lauraceae

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Plants Mid‑importance 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.

The Plant List is much more authoritative. Nadiatalent (talk) 18:19, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The list has been replaced, but much more cleanup is still required; some genera have become synonyms. Nadiatalent (talk) 23:02, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The following genera from the old list are not in the new one, have pages in wikipedia, and have not yet been cleaned up:

Adenodaphne, Anaueria, Appella, Brassiodendron, Cinnamonum, Dahlgrenodendron, Douglassia, Nesodaphne, Salgada, Temmodaphne

Nadiatalent (talk) 23:23, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update:

• Adenodaphne is taxonomically unresolved
• Anaueria, Brassiodendron, Dahlgrenodendron, Douglassia, Nesodaphne, Salgada are synonyms
• Appella is a rejected name (against Premna L.)
• Cinnamonum is illegitimate, an orthographic variant of 'Cinnamomum' (per tropicos.org)
• Temmodaphne is currently redirecting to Cinnamomum, but it is taxonomically unresolved.

Nadiatalent (talk) 01:23, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have not the resources to maintain such a large list in such a poorly established taxonomic structure. I simply inserted those that I found and that had links, on the basis that that could do no harm. From here on in, it is over to those equipped for more authoritative work on the articles. JonRichfield (talk) 09:56, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Der Text ist nicht in korrektem Englisch, er scheint aus dem Spanischen übertragen zu sein! Das muss überarbeitet werden. Der Begriff "Pavina" führt zu einem toten Link, es ist unklar, was damit gemeint ist (in dem Satz "ALKALOIDS bencilisoquinolidinics are present, ...as well as derivatives of Pavina.")Alchymist3 (talk) 19:09, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Entschuldige bitte dass ich in Englisch antworte. Ich kann Deutsch kaum nicht schreiben. You are quite correct of course. The original authors did originally base their contributions on texts in Iberian language(s) and on occasion have courteously requested Anglophone authors to assist in improving the language. Some of us have assisted piecemeal, over a long period, but the process is not yet complete. The text is however, already useful, gradually improving, and is approaching a satisfactory level of quality. JonRichfield (talk) 19:29, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Vous êtes optimiste, je crois! Nadiatalent (talk) 00:13, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ag Nadia, 'n gebrek aan optimisme verlam mos die aansporing om die wêreld te verbeter ;-) Ek sal maar gou 'n bietjie verder aan die artiekel werk. Mooi bly! And remember, "approaching" need not mean we are nearly there yet! (I used it as a cop-out word. Mea culpa.) JonRichfield (talk) 08:48, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bon, continuez. But I don't think that you'll get very far with a small-increments approach. Similar text has been added over the last few months to a vast number of pages, and continues to be added, in many cases it is not very notable and/or inaccurate. Nadiatalent (talk) 14:47, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You are right of course. Part of the trouble is that there is so much to do that unless one has the temperament to work on a small number of projects till they are well, not complete, but at least of a satisfactory standard, one does not reach perfection in any article. Oh well... JonRichfield (talk) 16:59, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Heute, 9.5.12, las ich den gesamten Lauraceae-Artikel auf Englisch neu, und war sehr überrascht und erfreut: im Vergleich zum Zustand, den ich im Februar vorfand, ist der Text nun stringent, alles Wesentliche ist drin, keine ermüdenden Wiederholungen mehr, was man weiß sowie was man noch nicht weiß, ist klar dargestellt, insbesondere die Probleme der Taxonomen, die unsichere Anzahl der Arten, die Abgrenzungen der Gattungen und Triben. Vielen Dank an NadiaTalent!Alchymist3 (talk) 21:10, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lauraceae. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070103200438/http://delta-intkey.com/angio/ to http://delta-intkey.com/angio/

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 08:01, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]