Talk:Attalea (plant)

Comment
"Orbignya" redirects here, but the page does not explain why. // habj (talk) 19:02, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Attalea (palm). 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20070221180119/http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/wcsp/home.do to http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/wcsp/home.do

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Authority name
- please use the talk page instead of edit warring. WP:BRD means discuss.

To the best of my understanding, Kunth in F.W.H.von Humboldt, A.J.A.Bonpland & C.S.Kunth is the proper authority, not mere "publishing details". The shorter form of this citation is H.B.K., not Kunth; after all,. For example, Glassman's classic treatment of the genus is titled "Preliminary taxonomic studies in the palm genus Attalea H.B.K." Guettarda (talk) 13:52, 28 April 2019 (UTC)


 * If my understanding of this is out of date, then by all means let me know. But, you know, please discuss. Guettarda (talk) 15:41, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Scientific botanical names are accompanied solely by the authority. To give further publishing details, please do so in the taxonomy section. The sole author is Kunth. All the main modern sources by renowned scholars you have used as references for this article agree with this. Frank R 1981 (talk) 17:32, 28 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi - can you provide a supporting citation for your claim? Some sort of factual backing? I have a source that says Kunth in F.W.H.von Humboldt, A.J.A.Bonpland & C.S.Kunth - surely Govaerts is a modern source. And, of course, I'm sure you're familiar with the nature of Kunth's publication of Humboldt and Bonpland's work. Guettarda (talk) 18:30, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

Sure, just check the many sources in the references section in this article, many of which I'm sure you read before using them as references.Frank R 1981 (talk) 21:23, 28 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I think it's clear that any "in" part of the full protologue is not part of giving the author(s) of a name. Thus IPNI, surely a definitive source, just has "Attalea Kunth" (see here). What matters is who published the new name, not whose name appears on the title page of the work in which the new name appeared. In taxoboxes by long-established convention we give the author(s) (and date for zoological names), not the full bibliographic reference. Peter coxhead (talk) 22:01, 28 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I checked the ICBN, and rule 46 supports this. I'm pretty sure it wasn't this way when I last trying to sort of Kunth vs H.B.K. stuff (granted, that was in the 90s, and since I was doing it without the internet, my sources might have been considerably older). Thanks. Guettarda (talk) 12:36, 29 April 2019 (UTC)`