User talk:Orchi

Invitation to join WikiProject Plants
Nobody has ever noticed you! How sad! Well, be BOLD! Aelwyn 07:41, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Caladenia
Thanks for the fix, I did one here too(I hope). Cheers, Cygnis insignis 12:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Category
You might be interested in this debate, to use the term loosely Category:Orchidaceae Cygnis insignis 13:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Orchids wiki
Hello Orchi

I would like to invite you to join Orchids Wiki on wikia dedicated on documenting orchid genres, species and hybrids. I have used most of your wiki commons pics on the site. If you have any questions please contact me. --Cs california (talk) 10:58, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for moving an article
I have yet to see what if anything happened to the genus page. So far, I think that the way to move articles and retain the editor history is to delete the redirection page (which should have the least amount of edits) and then simply move the article. I am unable to delete articles and have had good experience getting redirection pages I created deleted in a short time, but I am unable to think yet about what might be a soul sucking process of getting someone elses redirection page deleted. This has been about the Habenaria blephariglottis move. Thanks. -- carol (talk) 03:06, 4 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello, Carol Spears, thanks for your notice. I tried to change the article and the redirect-page with the valid botanical name. I'm sorry, but unfortunately I did'nt know, that the history of the article now is not correct. I spoke with the User:BerndH. He will try to repair the histories of the article and the "redirect" in the next days. Cheers. Orchi (talk) 22:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Huh, you are right about the history -- I didn't review it very well. I was moving articles like that when I first started and I am kind of sorry I did that now.  The thing I did right when I first started was to look at the list of what links to the articles and adjust those if they needed it; which was usually kind of an interesting stroll through the encyclopedia as well. -- carol (talk) 11:26, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Lewis Roberts
Hi again! Thank you so much for pointing out that the license information for the Malaxis xanthochila image was missing and also that I had somehow missed uploading three more images. It is most kind of you. I have just tried to fix the licensing and uploaded the other three images. I wonder if you could please, when you can spare the time, check them to see if I have done them correctly (I am not as confident on Wikimedia Commons as I am on Wikipedia). These are the problems with the files you pointed out:


 * File:LR053 72dpi Malaxis xanthochila.jpg (licence)
 * LR039_Grastidium cancroides (missing)
 * LR040_Grastidium tozerense (missing)
 * LR075_Taeniophyllum malianum (missing)

Thank you once again for spotting these deficiencies and letting me know about them - I really appreciate the help. Sincerely, John Hill (talk) 22:18, 29 August 2009 (UTC)


 * PS I will try to gradually create articles for each of the images - but am very busy at the moment so it will be a slow process. If anyone else would like to help I would be very grateful. I will also try to get Lewis Robert's latest botanical illustrations scanned and, if he will agree again, get more of his images up on Wikimedia Commons.


 * I would like to find some way of publicly thanking him for so generously sharing his beautiful and informative botanical illustrations but he is not at all computer literate (although I will show him some of the articles already done which include his images on my computer). Can you think of any way we can show recognition of his contributions? He is really a very shy man - but just a public "thank you" or something like a barnstar (maybe one that could go on his page in the Wikipedia (?)) would really be nice. I can't think what might be appropriate. Any ideas? Many thanks for all your help, John Hill (talk) 22:33, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Salvia forsskaolei
Hi, I've started a discussion at Talk:Salvia forsskaolei regarding your renaming of that article. It seems that there are so many variations and misspellings, given by different reliable sources, that neither the current name or the previous one may be correct! First Light (talk) 03:32, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, I took the name used by "Missouri Botanical Garden" and "Royal Botanic Gardens (Kew), London". I wish you success finding the correct name. Greetings.Orchi (talk) 16:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks - It's actually an unusual and interesting discussion there, now that some plant experts are involved. It seems that all plants named after Peter Forsskål have a similar confusion. Thanks for getting the ball rolling on this by renaming, First Light (talk) 16:24, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Bulbophyllum
Hi, Orchi,

I have try to delete this text "Two small Australian species, the previous B. globuliforme and B. minutissimum, were placed in 1961, in a new genus, Oncophyllum, of which they are the only members, and are now named Oncophyllum globuliforme and Oncophyllum minutissimum." from the article "Bulbophyllum" because of outdated information. The names Oncophyllum globuliforme and Oncophyllum minutissimum are at the moment according "The World Checlist of Selected Plant Families" (Kew) are only synonyms of two species of Bulbophyllum: Bulbophyllum globuliforme Nicholls, Orchidol. Zeylanica 5: 124 (1938) and Bulbophyllum minutissimum (F.Muell.) F.Muell., Fragm. 11: 53 (1878).

Oncophyllum globuliforme Oncophyllum minutissimum

Best Regards,Annusintercalaris (talk) 12:47, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello Annusintercalaris, I was oriented by KEW also. Greetings. Orchi (talk) 23:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello, Orchi, What I mean is that at the moment these two Australian orchids are included in the genus Bulbofyllum again and do not represent a separate genus. I think that should be avoided to place in the text of the main article current minor taxonomic changes as they occur very frequently. In my opinion they only bring confusion.

Greetings, Annusintercalaris (talk) 11:55, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

o.k. Greetings. Orchi (talk) 21:00, 11 January 2011 (UTC)


 * thx, Orchi! Annusintercalaris (talk) 15:41, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Sarcophyton (orchid)
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Sarcophyton (orchid), and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Sarcophyton. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page&mdash; you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:22, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Interwikis for Neottia
It's an interesting question as to what interwikis to put for Neottia. The other language versions don't seem to have caught up with the merger of Neottia and Listera. So, e.g., it's not quite right to show Neottia as equivalent to the the English article. Actually, Neottia is equivalent to Neottia + Listera. But interwikis can't cope with this, which is why I just left the links commented out and didn't attempt to add the Neottia ones. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:15, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * ....I repaired your version.Orchi (talk) 21:20, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I added the ones you found to the comments as well, so at least both sets are there if someone has a better way of sorting it in future... Peter coxhead (talk) 21:54, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

thanks for the help
User:Raabbustamante —Preceding undated comment added 02:55, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * ....You're welcome!Orchi (talk) 10:46, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

salep<orchis
hello;

salep is produced from the tubers of several orchis species-cultivars; & aparently only from orchis plants.

unless you have a better suggestion for how to define the relationship between the plant & the product(?), then salep belongs in the orchis categoey.

respectfully,

Lx 121 (talk) 06:30, 5 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Hello, I believed, the article and category Orchis would be a article and category for botanical themes and not for orchid products.


 * (By the way, it's interesting for me, that you inform me about Orchis-cultivars. I never heart this and perhaps you can tell me more and give me more informations. Hitherto I know the collecting of orchids for this product in the nature only. Therefore in the whole European Union it is strictly forbidden to dig out orchids for this product for example.)


 * Sincerely. Orchi (talk) 10:48, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:01, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 30
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Tetramicra (orchid), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Vale. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:07, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Diuris (etc.)
Hello Orchi,

My greetings to you too! and thank you for thanking me (for my labels). They actually only take a few minutes - it's the articles that are time consuming.

About the type species for Diuris. I use the Australian Plant Name Index as the authority for Australian plants. This page notes that James Edward Smith did not designate a type species. The source you used quotes Smith's book "Exotic Botany" which is Smith's description of Diuris aurea but there is no mention of this being designated as the type species. Instead, (on page 13 of the same book) Smith notes "Both these accounts relate merely to the generic character, nor has any author particularized any of the numerous species..." So, it appears the genus was described without a description of a species. Also on page 13, Smith describes Diuris punctata so that species was described at the same time as D. aurea. (Maybe one of us should quiz Wesley Higgins - Higgins@alumni.ufl.edu who wrote the paper you referred to.)

I am not an expert on orchids but I have some good books on the subject and will try to identify the orchids in the images you mentioned.

All the very best to you Orchi. I've seen the great work you've done over many years and hope you will keep going for many more. Gderrin (talk)


 * Hello Gderrin, thank you for your quick and detailed response. I have changed in Commons and Wikispecies all infos according to your message.


 * To contact Wesley Higgins and to explain this question is too difficult for my not good English unfortunately.


 * I hope, that I can supplement your excellent orchid articles in the English Wikipedia in Commons and Wikispecies furthermore. Regards. Orchi (talk) 15:37, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your compliments. I've been looking at Caladenia species. The Australian Plant Name Index says "Type:not designated" (as for Diuris) BUT Mark Clements designated Caladenia carnea as the type species (as you have correctly stated) in "Australian Orchid Research" Catalogue of Australian Orchidaceae (1989) p. 20. (This paper is also quoted by Mr. Higgins.)

Now I have a problem. On page 66 of the same paper by Clements is written - Diuris Smith Trans. Linn. Soc. London 4:222 (1798). Type species: Diuris aurea Smith. That means I am wrong! Dammit. I don't understand. I am sorry to have wasted your time but I have fixed my mistake. Greetings from Oz. Gderrin (talk)

I have great pleasure in Australian orchids and I think we will do our best here. Greeting. Orchi (talk) 14:30, 16 September 2016 (UTC) ''and to you. Gderrin (talk) 20:32, 6 February 2017 (UTC)''


 * Hello again Orchi,
 * Unfortunately, the image in Commons is definitely not that of C. fragrantissima. (It grows in a different Australian state.) I made a note on the discussion page. I think it's C. longicauda subsp. eminems, but I'm not sure. All the best to you and thanks for your work on orchids. Gderrin (talk) 13:18, 6 February 2017 (UTC) There is a good CC image here but I don't know how to download-upload it. Maybe you do? Gderrin (talk) 13:43, 6 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello Gderrin,


 * I already thought, why you did not used the picture in your article. Unfortunately, I have no specific literature on Australian orchids.
 * The uploader of the image does a good job here and I trusted in his identification.
 * Perhaps we will soon get a correct picture here. I think, the picture, you show has a copyright and can not be used in WP.


 * You had my change in your article reset. Please have a look for the third synonym. Sorry - careless of me. Replaced.
 * By the way. Last week I visited a side presentation about the orchids of Tasmania. Wonderful country!!  Indeed. Nearly as spectacular as N.Z. South Is. and Bernese Oberland.
 * Best greetings. Orchi (talk) 17:22, 6 February 2017 (UTC) and to you. Gderrin (talk) 20:32, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Caladenia tessellata
Hello again Orchi,

Thanks again for all your work fixing my mistakes here and on Commons. It's great to know that at least one person is looking at my work! I am curious about why you redirected Caladenia tessellata to Caladenia cardiochila. I think this might be a mistake. The two species are similar (as noted on the C. cardiochila page) and sometimes the two species are mistaken for each other (as noted here) but C. tessellata occurs in New South Wales and C. cardiochila in Victoria. Both species are listed at IPNI and described at the relevant state herbaria and both are described in my principal reference (Jones). Please let me know your reasons.

Looking forward to your answer - maybe you have saved me a couple of hours writing! https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Orchi&offset=&limit=500&target=Orchi (talk) 23:15, 22 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello Gderrin,


 * of course you are right. My mistake was caused by the use of an automatic script to redirect all synonyms of Caladenia as you see here:.


 * So created the "redirect" the synonyms of this page automatically: Caladenia cardiochila. (My mistake!!) All fixed - we now have Caladenia cardiochila and Caladenia tessellata. Gderrin (talk) 22:53, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I thank you for your perfect work in Australian orchids.
 * Best greetings. Orchi (talk) 13:37, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Now I understand. Thank you. I hope you see some wild Australian orchids soon. Gderrin (talk) 20:00, 23 March 2017 (UTC)


 * ....they are so far away ;-) Orchi (talk) 20:04, 23 March 2017 (UTC) ..... and you might be tempted to stay! Gderrin (talk) 22:53, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Hello Raabbustamante, thanks for your kind regards!! I hope, you contribute further good and rare pictures of orchids from your home here. Best regards. Orchi (talk) 10:42, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Notability : Botanist
Hi User:Orchi, what is the rules for entries for Botanists. are they Notable in itseld if they have published books, and several papers?I created an entry for Jaap Vermuelen, but User:Elmidae added WP:NOTABILITY. Raabbustamante (talk) 05:48, 22 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Hallo Raabbustamante, unfortunately, I do not know the rules of th English WP. I think, J.J. Vermeulen is an important living scientist. More information and publications could be translatet from nl. WP. to en. WP.


 * Here the links to Wikispecies, a part of his accepted first descriptions, his descriptions and his notice in IPNI. Greetings. Orchi (talk) 10:04, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * (small correction: I did not add the notability notice, I reinstated one that had been present for two years, and had just been removed by Raabbustamante w/o good justification)
 * The notability requirements for academics on en-wiki are here: WP:NACADEMIC. Skimming over the nl-wiki entry with my fractional Dutch, I'm not sure Vermeulen qualifies, but it is entirely possible. In any case, this needs to be shown in both text and references, and at the moment the article text does zip for that - because there hardly is any. I'd say that importing some actual content from the nl article would be a necessary first step. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:24, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * ...thanks for this explanation. Orchi (talk) 18:48, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
A very Merry Christmas to you Orchi, and a prosperous and Orchidaceous New Year! Gderrin (talk) 19:06, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikispecies (and Commons) links in articles
Hi, I saw your additions of links to Wikispecies and Commons to some of the orchid articles I've been working on. Just to say that my view is that now links to these two automatically appear in the left margin via Wikidata, it's not necessary to add them to articles (just as we don't now add links to other language wikis to articles). I wondered what you think of this proposition. Peter coxhead (talk) 13:03, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello Peter coxhead, thanks for your information. I did not know that this way is already running automatically. Please can you show me the way so that the link to commons does not lead to the category, but to the gallery? The processing of orchids is usually better organized in the articles. Thanks for your help and greetings. Orchi (talk) 18:35, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


 * If there is a gallery, and you think it's better than the category, then that's a good reason to add the relevant template to the article. I should have been clear above that it's only the link to the category that is automatically added – at present, anyway. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:21, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 * P.S. my German is definitely de-1, but your English is definitely better than en-1! Peter coxhead (talk) 21:25, 23 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Hello Peter coxhead, I am glad that you accept my preference for galleries. Orchi (talk) 17:39, 24 March 2018 (UTC)
 * to P.S. ….long long time ago (in the fifties and the beginnig sixties) I learned seven years Latin, four years ancient Greek, two years Spanish and only three years English. So today I am unhappy, that I am often need a dictionary in your mother tongue. ;-)

2019 and beyond
Hello Orchi,

All the very best to you and Die Grüße der Jahreszeit! Thanks for your huge volume of work. I hope 2019 is a great year for you. Gderrin (talk) 20:41, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Category:Ada (plant) has been nominated for discussion
Category:Ada (plant), which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Peel (talk) 18:00, 12 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Hello Mike Peel, I think, this category and the article (defined as synonym) should be redirected to Brassia. Regards. Orchi (talk) 18:08, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Category:Ascocentrum


A tag has been placed on Category:Ascocentrum indicating that it is currently empty, and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion. If it remains empty for seven days or more, it may be deleted under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself. Liz Read! Talk! 18:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

"Calonemorchis radiatum (" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Calonemorchis_radiatum_(&redirect=no Calonemorchis radiatum (] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:35, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

"Calonema radiatum (" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Calonema_radiatum_(&redirect=no Calonema radiatum (] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:35, 20 January 2024 (UTC)