Talk:Nymphaeaceae/Archive 1

removed image
The Image:Waterlily1web.jpg was removed. I'm afraid the plant shown on it can't be identified precisely. Therefore, with all its artistic qualities, it doesn't give any new information, since there are already three other images, properly identified and of reasonable quality. Iorsh 06:53, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)



This is a hardy water lily hybrid which looks to me is the hybrid called N. 'James Brydon.' --Dara 03:06, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

Is anyone seriously opposed to moving this article to a page called Nymphaeaceae, and having the common names of water lily link there? It'd be nice if the plant taxonomy articles all used a smilar naming convention for their pages--nixie 03:21, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * That's would be against the naming convention of Wikipedia and of the Tree of Life Wikiproject. I would stick to the standard, but if you want to debate it, I would find the discussion there.  Sorry I can't point you directly to it. --Chinasaur


 * I don't suppose that it matters anyway since all the plants in the family are called water-lillies--nixie 21:33, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)


 * Similar discussion has been dragging along with orchids, without much of a definitive resolution. Only a few families actually match up with a common name, so it doesn't come up often. I'd say to leave it at common name, people who look at lists of families will know what is going on, while nonspecialists seeing this article for the first time would be mystified by getting redirected to an "aceae". Stan 22:26, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Confusing..
This page is very confusing. I searched for water lilies and it redirected me to this page (water lily) which seems to an article on Nymphaeaceae (the water lily family) and water lilies merged together. And I notice some very common mistakes in the article like the confusion about lotus and waterlilies.

I think that the term waterlily or waterlilies should redirect viewers to the Nymphaea (the genus name of water lilies) page. And Nymphaeaceae should be it's own page because Nymphaeaceae is the name of the water lily family which includes other genera besides Nymphaea (water lilies) like Nuphar, Barclaya, Nelumbo, etc. --Dara 03:20, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed (except that Nelumbo isn't in this family); I'm working on it - MPF 11:10, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Done - MPF 13:42, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I've changed the page "Water lily" to a disambiguation that redirects to Nymphaeaceae and Nelumbonaceae. Nov 2 2006

Nymphaeaceae is quoted as the common ancestor of all flowering plants by David Attenborough in his "Kingdom of Plants" on the television last night (21-10-12). I would mention the wind dispersal aspect clearly referred to by Attenborough evident in gymnosperms, is present in Monocot species like cereals and reeds (Commelinids). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.228.176.170 (talk) 01:29, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

I agree that it is important to make sure that Nelumbo is *not* included here -- it is definitely not part of Nymphaeaceae. I believe the reference to the longevity of Nymphaeaceae seeds also really refers to Nelumbo -- some 2000 year old Nelumbo (Sacred Lotus) seeds were germinated -- but I do not believe the same can be said for anything in Nymphaeaceae.
 * Yeah, you're probably right. I removed it, and it can stay out until it is sourced.  Please feel free to edit things of this nature  yourself as it was a good catch.KP Botany 19:52, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Just One Simple Question..
I Just Want To Know HOW The Lily Pad Is Made.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.119.69.230 (talk) 04:46, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Size
I've just commented-out the sloppy statement about size in the leader, which has been there at least a year. The plants spread by rhizomes, to form beds. This needs to be clarified, rather than implying that in a plant (connected by rhizomes) 40 metres across, the leaves and stems are all connected to one point at the base. I've not done this because it also really needs a reliable citation, as does the leaf size, as it's one of those things that get distorted by heresay. If you can help with citation, please do. As for how big a plant will grow in a pond, this seems a useless statement: it will grow to fill most ponds! – subject to competition. I suspect the writer was alluding to largest leaf size.  Trev M ~  14:50, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Too technical
Description should be split into a simple description and the botanical description. I merely want to know how the plant works; how it grows to the surface, how it adapts to the water level, if the seeds sink to the bottom, etc.

Very good question Souravgg8 (talk) 20:18, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Large yellow pond lily listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Large yellow pond lily. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:39, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:25, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Niloofare Abi.jpg