Talk:Cosmos bipinnatus

How come is the monarch butterfly attracted to the seeds? I have cosmos and monarchs do come but (I think) not for the seeds but for the flowers and nectar. I suggest the author should cite the reference and/or explain why the butterfly is attracted to the seeds. I think the information (changed and made untrue) came from this site: http://plantanswers.tamu.edu/flowers/cosmos/cosmos.html I will change it back to what it should be Pro bug catcher 13:23, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Drought tolerance?
I disagree with the current description of this plant as not tolerating drought, even though it's referenced to a book. This is based on a search of cosmos bipinnatus drought site:.edu (sorry no permalink, don't know why). For example, Colorado State University's extension service site lists it as one of 'some drought-tolerant annuals' and the University of Georgia's extension service has it in a 'Ornamental Plants Known to Have Above Average Drought Tolerance'. Of course drought is a relative term, the authors of the book may have been talking about really arid conditions. So how can we rework this? Novickas (talk) 00:02, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cosmos bipinnatus. 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/20071215031014/http://www.cordobes.com/30dias/noticia13.html to http://www.cordobes.com/30dias/noticia13.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:27, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Half-hardiness an erroneous term according to article on hardiness
The section deacribing the plant describes it as an half-hardy annual. However, the word half-hardy links to the article on hardiness, which states that half-hardy is an erroneous term.

I removed the contradictory description from this article. However, neither claim has a citation. Which leaves me at an impass as to how to deal with this. Should the claim be removed from both articles? Or just have a citation needed added to the claim on the page for hardiness?VoidHalo (talk) 14:59, 14 October 2023 (UTC)


 * The term “half-hardy” is widely used and referenced in British literature, for a plant which requires protection during part of its life. Many annuals have to be sown under glass during the winter months, and later hardened off for flowering outside.Darorcilmir (talk) 16:01, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I think the term "half-hardy" needs to be added to Hardiness (plants) to help prevent this sort of confusion in the future. Do you have a good book that would define the term as it is used in British gardening? Then it can be added back to article on Cosmos. Edit: wait, I found a pretty good one on archive.org. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 16:29, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed!Darorcilmir (talk) 17:02, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Fixed there and reworded for clarity here. Really the whole article needs quite a bit of work. I will put it on my list to work on along with the other 2000+ articles I need to write or rewrite. I also don't understand why it has the "written like a research paper or scientific journal" tag. This is one of the more casually written articles I have seen about wildflowers. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 17:38, 14 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Cheers! I too am editing articles from a gardening viewpoint - so will be casting a beady eye over both entries. Darorcilmir (talk) 18:56, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I believe it was probably tagged that way because of the writing style in the Description and following sections, which consists of extremely short terse pseudo-sentences that are actually point-form notes filled with specialist terminology; for lack of a better name I will arbitrarily call it "Botanist's Field Notes Style". It needs real, English-teacher-style sentences, that describe and explain the material rather than merely giving a list of characteristics. Botanists might then complain that they are being asked to rewrite the Description section (and other parts) as if this was an article to be printed in a children's magazine; they would be essentially correct about that. TooManyFingers (talk) 06:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * ... if we assume some fairly bright children. :) TooManyFingers (talk) 06:38, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah that explains the confusion. Well, thanks to you guys for clarifying that and making the appropriate changes. It's much appreciated. VoidHalo (talk) 06:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)