Talk:Acacia bivenosa

Indigenous names
According to MOS:FOREIGN, Foreign words should be used sparingly. and Where possible, non-English should be marked up using the appropriate..... Given than Indigenous names are not foreign then they really should stay. Thanks for clearing that up Mark! Hughesdarren (talk) 01:43, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * "Foreign" here means "words that have not been assimilated into English". Are murrurpa, murrurbaor, morama, mururru and mururr used in Australian English as English words, in the way that, say, "kookaburra" is? I think not. So they should be marked up as non-English words for the benefit of screen readers, if nothing else.
 * Are they sufficiently notable to pass WP:NOTEVERYTHING? Can it be shown that they are widely used in reliable sources? Peter coxhead (talk) 10:32, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The only mention of that definition of foreign I'm seeing in MOS:FOREIGN is Loanwords or phrases that have been assimilated into and have common use in English, such as praetor.. The words are italised so that is not a problem. Can you point me to where it says in the MOS that foreign means: "words that have not been assimilated into English"? Hughesdarren (talk) 11:19, 4 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I don't believe this information should be in the article, but if it is, it doesn't belong in Taxonomy – it has nothing to do with taxonomy I follow sources that think it notable and it is everything to do with taxonomy, ie. a scheme of classification. — cygnis insignis 13:18, 4 September 2018 (UTC)