Talk:Wildflower

Rant in article should be removed
I think this text should be deleted entirely, a seeming rant against a the simple meaning of a word, and commercial seed companies, and in general unsubstantiated matters of opinion:

"Yet "wildflower" meadows of a few mixed species are sold in seed packets. The term "wildflower" has been made vague by commercial seedsmen who are interested in selling more flowers or seeds more expensively than when labeled with only its name and/or origin. The term implies that the plant probably is neither a hybrid nor a selected cultivar that is in any way different from the way it appears in the wild as a native plant, even if it is growing where it would not naturally.

Scientists do not refer to wildflowers and generally try to discourage people from using the term altogether. Terms like native species (naturally occurring in the area, see Flora (plants)), exotic or, better, introduced species (not naturally occurring in the area), of which some are labelled invasive species (that out-compete other plants – whether native or not), imported (introduced to an area whether deliberately or accidentally) and naturalized (introduced to an area, but now considered by the public as native) are much more accurate." forgot to sign this Nickrz 15:14, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes this is a terrible page
I think this needs drastic change as well. For one thing it fails to mention the link with more traditional agricultural practices (UK - hay meadows etc), link with the notion of weeds (agriculture and general), or semi natural and natural plant comunities. A mention that they are usually the forb content of grassland systems such as prarie, wet meadows, flood meadows, hedges, woodland understories (not strickly grassland, but the UK Forestry Commission recognised as proportion of woodland can be grassland), gardens, field margins as well as created habitats. I work with wildflowers, and the current page seems terrible. Something for me to work on perhaps...

Kipple2020 13:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

WILD FLOWERS
could you PLEASE add an article about Wild Pink, Silene caroliniana. I'm doing aproject for school and this information would be valued. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 151.199.192.173 (talk) 18:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC).

poetry
This page kills the magic of the wildflower mustn't use the natural beautiful term It isn't scientifically correct

There is no other way to say The short bloom Transient beauty Sway in the wind Tantalize the nose mystify the eye A splash of color In my grey world There is no name but Wildflower — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.253.149.80 (talk) 01:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

wild flowers are GAY —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.20.123.22 (talk) 18:46, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * What the hell are you talking about? 60.160.78.234 (talk) 05:38, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

While this page does say the basic things and they aren't biased, this page could use a lot of improvement. The author could use more sources to explain more about what wildflowers are and maybe could say what they do to benefit or harm the environment. The author could also add more about the examples that they use in the article. The author should also use some citations in the article.

Kralikr (talk) 19:45, 22 January 2017 (UTC)