Talk:Philadelphus

Wild mock-orange
Wild mock-orange was removed from a common name of P. lewisii, because "wild" is meaningless. Common names are not required to be meaningful. "Wild mock-orange" really is a common name. Look at, or. Lewis's mock-orange is just a translation of the binomial, it really isn't a commonly used common name. I assume that "wild mock-orange" is used for P. lewisii because it is the most common garden Philadelphus. I would like to put "wild mock-orange" back.Nereocystis 18:21, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: moved. DrKiernan (talk) 15:45, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Mock-orange → Philadelphus – The vast majority of plant articles in Wiki are listed under their Latin name, as this name is unambiguous and applicable across all disciplines and cultures. The Latin name also places the plant within its family and links it correctly to its species. The plant is not related to the true orange plant. "Mock-orange" is especially ambiguous because it is used, with or without the hyphen, for at least five other plants. The term Philadelphus is widely preferred as a heading in the gardening literature, encyclopedias, plant catalogues etc. Darorcilmir (talk) 03:52, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. "Mock-orange" should be a DAB/SETINDEX, and should probably mention P. coronarius specifically (apparently "THE mock-orange") in addition to Philadelphus and other mock-oranges.Plantdrew (talk) 21:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose You need to provide evidence that Philadelphus is the common name, which you have so far failed to do.  A mere assertion that "The term Philadelphus is widely preferred as a heading in the gardening literature, encyclopedias, plant catalogues etc." is just not good enough without the evidence.  Skinsmoke (talk) 08:35, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Google Scholar results: Philadelphus -Ptolemy 8640 (alhough there are still some history related results), "mock orange" 2820. General Google results: Philadelphus -Ptolemy 630k; "mock orange" 434k (also includes results for a band and a bike shop). Of the 46 non-redirect, article space incoming links to this article, 24 come via the redirect Philadelphus, 22 link to Mock-orange/Mockorange, but 9 of those links actually pipe Philadelphus to mock-orange, and 4 more have the link to mock-orange immediately followed by a parenthetical Philadelphus.


 * "Mock-orange" is ambiguous in two ways; it can refer to 5 unrelated plants (see DAB at Mock Orange), or it can refer to the most widely cultivated species of Philadelphus, Philadelphus coronarius. Most of the garden related Google results use mock orange specfically for P. coronarius or its hybrids, and usage of the term for the genus as a whole is rare. If an article is to be titled "mock orange", it should be Philadelphus coronarius, but the term will remain ambiguous.Plantdrew (talk) 16:09, 1 February 2013 (UTC)
 * With respect, Skinsmoke, COMMONAME often defers to more specialized naming conventions, such as MOS:MED or, in this case, WP:FLORA, which reads, in part, "Scientific names are to be used as article titles in all cases except when a plant has an agricultural, horticultural, economic or cultural use that makes it more prominent in some other field than in botany." So quite the opposite, in fact—if you oppose this move, you should be demonstrating why the common name is important or widespread enough to override the general preference for scientific names. --BDD (talk) 18:03, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Support per WP:FLORA. --BDD (talk) 18:03, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.