Talk:Pimelea curviflora

Etymology of curviflora
The epithet curviflora is derived from the Latin adjectives curvus meaning "curved", becoming curvi- in the combined form (as in curvisepalus or curviflora) and -florus meaning "-flowered".
 * Something written with a hyphen, such as -florus, is not a separate adjective. Are all those three sources mistaken? Eggli writes: "curviftorus Lat. 'curvus', curved, bent; and Lat. '-florus', -flowered; for the incurved petals." This sources does not indicate that "-florus" would be an adjective. So, are those two other sources mistaken? Wimpus (talk) 22:10, 6 February 2020 (UTC)


 * The word "adjective" was not used in the article. The etymology in the article is consistent with all three sources listed below. Reminder: Do not remove sources without discussion and reaching consensus first. Gderrin (talk) 23:48, 6 February 2020 (UTC)


 * "The etymology in the article is consistent with all three sources listed below." In an older version of Sharr (1978) it is stated: "curviflorus: L curvus crooked, bent + flos, floris flower." That version of Sharr does not indicate that curviflorus is a combination of two adjectives. Maybe, you have misinterpreted George and Sharr or George has misinterpreted the earlier version of Sharr and incorrectly altered the original description of Sharr.


 * Regarding my edit on Eucalyptus leucophloia: In your first attempt: "The specific epithet (leucophloia) is taken from the Greek words, leucos meaning "white" and phloius meaning "-barked", in reference to the "strikingly white bark".  ", you introduced the non-Greek phloius and did not seem to notice that the incorrect phloius of George and Sharr is incompatible with the incorrect non-Greek form "phloeos" as provided by Boland et al. (2006).
 * In your second attempt: "The specific epithet (leucophloia) is derived from ancient Greek words meaning "white" and "-barked", " you did not seem to notice that there is actually not a Greek word meaning "-barked" from which leucophloia could be derived. How many attempts do you need to get it right, while in the mean time, incorrect etymological information is published on Wikipedia?
 * Reminder: In case you are not sure, do not make an edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wimpus (talk • contribs)

1. Regarding the etymology of curviflora, both the editor who wrote the original etymology and I have quoted Sharr accurately. 2. This is not the place to discuss other articles. 3. Please remember to sign your contributions by using four tildes (WP:SIG) Gderrin (talk) 01:14, 7 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your input Wimpus, however the edit is intended to be basic information on a genus/species. It is not a detailed lesson in botany or Latin, the etymology being a minor addition. I use references of world renowned botanist/taxonomists  publications.  Therefore it is not my interpretation of the Latin but the quoting of the Latin text by acclaimed scientists.  There are hundreds of plant species on Wikipedia that have no etymology, perhaps your knowledge would be a welcome addition to those incomplete edits.Allthingsnative (talk) 02:32, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Gderrin: "1. Regarding the etymology of curviflora, both the editor who wrote the original etymology and I have quoted Sharr accurately."
 * Allthingsnative: "Therefore it is not my interpretation of the Latin but the quoting of the Latin text by acclaimed scientists."
 * Allthingsnative wrote: "The specific epithet (curviflora) is derived from the Latin words curvi meaning "curved" and florus meaning "flowered".
 * Did George and Sharr wrote that curvi and florus are both separate words? In the correction of Gderrin, curvi and florus became word-forming elements curvi- and -florus, while using the same source. The same source is interpreted differently by two editors. So, what is actually written by George and Sharr?
 * Writing about etymology is not about simply "quoting" acclaimed scientists.
 * @Allthingsnative: I noticed that in a few of your recent etymological edits, potentially false etymologies were added to Wikipedia (see  )
 * "The specific epithet (pagophila) is named from the Greek pago meaning "hill or mountain" and philea meaning "to love" with reference  to the habitat of the species." (rock is pagos (πάγος), not pago, first person singular of "to love" is phileō (φιλέω), not philea)
 * "The specific epithet (aeruginosa) is derived from the Latin word aeruginosus meaning "verdigris" with reference to the flower bracts when dry." (aeruginosus is an adjective, not a noun like verdigris, that is actually aerugo)
 * "The specific epithet (pauciflora) is from the Latin word pauci- meaning "few" and -florus meaning "flowered" (something with a hyphen like "pauci-" is not a word).
 * Maybe those acclaimed scientists made those mistakes, maybe your interpretation is incorrect. But we shouldn't be carelessly adding false etymologies to Wikipedia. Allthingsnative, I do not infer, that you have willingly added potentially false etymologies to Wikipedia, but I would like to stress, that is important to read a source carefully and in case of doubt, refrain from making such an etymological edit. Wimpus (talk) 08:18, 7 February 2020 (UTC)