Talk:Asexual reproduction of plants

New stuff at bottom, please.

To merge or not to merge, that is the question
I know that this was an assignment for our class, so I will work on merging this and editing it this week. No hard feelings. ~cpsmath

This topic deserves an article in its own right. Don't merge it! The merge will just be reverted anyway. On the other hand, the stub Asexual Reproduction should be expanded, and an Asexual Reproduction of Animals should exist if it doesn't. 4.250.27.24 06:40, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

I readded the merge tag because I have a different idea. Since you have some potentially great info about vegetative reproduction, why not add that in on that page and then put the rest on asexual reproduction? The part about advantages/disadvantages fits there perfectly and the other stuff isn't enough to justify a full article I think. -Schrei 07:29, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't know whether to merge this page or not.

Certianly no merging is called for. A general discussion of asexual reproduction would become too incomprehensible if burdened with an extensive article about plant propogation. The subjects are certainly closely related, but for convience sake it is better to have then seperate and linked. ~Jayar Thnen, horticulture student

The terms asexual reproduction and vegetative reproduction are not synonymous. There is enough of a difference in usage that I would recommend against merging. The two articles should be prominently linked, however. --User:EncycloPetey, botany freak, 7 Oct 2005


 * I concur. We have 2 options: 1 is to merge them and bias an article encompassing all organisms towards plants. 2 is to have articles on asexual reproduction for each of the kingdoms--not just plants and animals--and have summaries of each on the asexual reproduction page, with a "main article" link. I favor #2. HereToHelp 12:30, 13 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I have removed the accuracy dispute template since there have only been a few edits recently and there does not actually seem to be any accuracy dispute.


 * I agree the two subjects are sufficiently different to justify two articles, but the relevant parts of this article should be merged into Vegetative reproduction which is a more standard botanical terminology than "Asexual reproduction of plants" also a poor article title. Essentially, User:Schrei has the right approach - Marshman 04:21, 5 January 2006 (UTC)