Talk:Vaccinium

Berries
Wow. Someone really likes berries. I mean, I like a good berry now and again, but... wow. 4.231.160.56 03:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Links for whortleberry and lingonberry
This doesn't seem to come up often enough to have made it into WP:LINK (at least, not that I found), but as a reader I find it annoying to follow two links in an article (in this case, "bilberry" and "whortleberry"), only to find that one is a redirect to the other. Giftlite, care to give the case for having them both be links? Kingdon 23:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Kingdon, I saw the series "...including the cranberry, blueberry, bilberry or whortleberry, cowberry or lingonberry, and huckleberry," and I thought the other two berries deserved wlinks, as well. Maybe it would be better to use parentheses instead.  Giftlite 15:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure whether parentheses would be controversial; at least in the case of cowberry there has been a lot of discussion about the names of those articles (see Talk:Cowberry). Kingdon 16:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Oxycoccos / Oxycoccus and oxycoccos / oxycoccus spelling chaos
Please see Talk:Cranberry --Espoo (talk) 17:38, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

"Food uses": add...
Under the "Food uses" heading, someone (who knows which species are eaten by humans [e.g., "blueberries," cranberries [V. macrocarpum]]) please add "eaten by humans as food…"! :) philiptdotcom (talk) 19:48, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

"Production": please clarify table...
Under the "Production" heading, someone please clarify in the text (or--preferably--the table heading) to WHICH SPECIES (or is it ALL species of Vaccinium?) the table refers. (Is it just V. macrocarpum? This is implied by the photo in that section, but it is NOT stated--and it must be!)  philiptdotcom (talk) 19:51, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Names need authorities....subsections make placing new species difficult
Vaccinium stenophyllum Steud. is a tropical species that can be found at http://www.tropicos.org/Name/12302882. I dont know where any of the speicies names in the list came from or how to place new species in the current scheme. This means I have to break the scheme or guess. This system is not general enough for the current needs. Since the article admits that the classification is in doubt and the current presentation is unwieldy for adding new species I propose to delete the subgenera as they are. Avram Primack (talk) 16:54, 27 September 2016 (UTC)