Talk:Sambucus racemosa subsp. racemosa

Autonym authority
Ah, of course you're right about that. The Code is clear on that point but I had forgotten. Probably too much time staring at IPNI and other databases that do often repeat the authority for the autonym, e.g. [http://ipni.org/ipni/idPlantNameSearch.do?id=50747-3 Drosera peltata subsp. peltata Thunb.]. I think you found a way to discuss it that gives all the info without being awkward. Nicely done. Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 04:20, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * It is unfortunate that so many authorities (I'm including IPNI), are inconsistent about using rules of the Code. As an amateur, I'm often unsure of whom to cite when authorities disagree on a whole host of matters. Often I find that I must cite both/all, and say in the text that there is disagreement, even when I know that one or more of them is wrong, but don't know which ones. (sigh) Will we ever escape the proverbial Tower of Babel? Thanks, Hamamelis (talk) 18:26, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Additional reference
POWO https://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:77225817-1 if it can be added with the correct formatting please - MPF (talk) 00:28, 27 January 2024 (UTC)