Talk:Chenopodiastrum murale

Synonym Rhagodia baccata
Rhagodia baccata is listed as a synonym of Chenopodium murale in the database listed as the citation, but it seems premature to replace the Rhagodia baccata page with a redirect to this page because the synonym is not (yet) listed with high confidence. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 17:30, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Page move not in line with wikipedia conventions
This page was moved to a new binomial, Chenopodiastrum murale, on the basis of a single taxonomic paper, but (sorry) that is not the way wikipedia works. We wait until the secondary sources, particularly The Plant List have incorporated the changes before making them here. (As the page stands right now, the statement about synonyms with citation to TPL is completely false.) Sminthopsis84 (talk) 19:02, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the proposal was not moved. --BDD (talk) 19:33, 15 July 2013 (UTC)

Chenopodiastrum murale → Chenopodium murale – As explained above, the previous move was not in line with procedure for plant nomenclature, specifically the use of secondary rather than primary sources. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 19:11, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment The move may have been premature. User:Thiotrix has moved another 15-20 pages to reflect recent publications by Fuentes-Bazan, so this move request should probably apply to all of Thiotrix's recent moves. NPGS/GRIN is following Fuentes-Bazan for this species (and presumably for the others); NPGS/GRIN isn't the first site I'd go to for taxonomy, but it is a secondary source and while NPGS/GRIN is quick to adopt new classifications, it does seem to be well curated (an aside; I found a misspelled species in EOL yesterday that originated in Wikipedia; EOL is not as well curated as I thought).  Tropicos has Chenopodiastrum murale now; not that Tropicos ever takes a definitive position on classification itself, but The Plant List does, and TPL gets data from Tropicos. I'm not at all confident that TPL will check the data next time they mine Tropicos; TPL may end up both combinations "accepted" (a sitation I've seen before at TPL). Also, APNI is aware of Fuentes-Bazan's publication synonymizing Einadia and Rhagodia in Chenopodium, but APC hasn't adopted Fuentes-Bazan yet (Thiotrix also made some Rhagodia related moves). In summary; NPGS/GRIN is a secondary source that supports the move, but liberally follows cutting edge research; TPL might be better overall, but I'm not sure their algorithms are any better than the radical data curators at NPGS/GRIN. Plantdrew (talk) 16:22, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * That sounds like good logic. NPGS/GRIN is an excellent secondary source for the nomenclature of agricultural weeds like this one. I'm willing to withdraw the move request, which would naturally be followed by changing the synonym list to reflect NPGS/GRIN. Perhaps it would be wise to wait a day or two to see if anyone else disagrees. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 19:53, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the synonym list to match the page name. (As a participant in the discussion, I cannot close the move request, though.) Sminthopsis84 (talk) 14:04, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with Plantdrew that the move is perhaps a bit premature as the new name combination is not (yet) shown as accepted in many of the on-line secondary sources that we regularly cite. Now that the move has occurred though, it would seem a retrograde step to revert it. Although this move request is no longer supported by its nominator, Sminthopsis84, I think it would be a good idea to leave it running full term as any issues raised here may reflect on the 15-20 page moves mentioned above. Melburnian (talk) 01:08, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.