Talk:Cheirodendron trigynum
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cheirodendron trigynum. 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/20070702123653/http://www2.bishopmuseum.org/ethnobotanydb/resultsdetailed.asp?search=olapa to http://www2.bishopmuseum.org/ethnobotanydb/resultsdetailed.asp?search=olapa
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) 01:11, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
Description and photo[edit]
I was hoping to find either a good description or a good photo in order to identify the plant on my own photos, but unfortunately I found neither in this article.
Sorry to say so, but the image in the article really isn't helpful at all. I see at least two totally different plants in that picture, and there's no clue which one is even meant. Not to mention the fact that the picture does not tell me much more about the plant than that it has green leaves.
I searched Commons for better pictures, but there is such a great variance in the leaves that I am not sure which one would be best to take. Also, I really don't understand why there is such a great variance. Do the leaves change their shape over time? Or did half of the uploaders misidentify the plant? --2003:C0:8F1E:E900:887:A232:6D95:41C0 (talk) 16:06, 12 December 2019 (UTC)