Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Isopogon anemonifolius/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 02:28, 16 March 2016.

Isopogon anemonifolius

 * Nominator(s): Cas Liber (talk · contribs) & 20:11, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Another collaboration, this came together well and is comprehensive and cohesive. We'll hop to it and fix any issues quick-like. Have at it. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:11, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

And yes it's a wikicup nomination. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:15, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Image review
 * File:Woorikee2000.jpg: can you verify and replace the autogenerated source? Nikkimaria (talk) 18:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok I updated the article page. I uploaded that a looong time ago. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:01, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments by FunkMonk

 * "He gave it the name Leucadendron apiifolium, but never officially described it." Perhaps mention that it is therefore a Nomen nudum? FunkMonk (talk) 19:13, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Good point - will try to find a source Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:22, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Finding material on this is proving difficult.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:13, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Looking at the definition of nomen nudum, it has to be published without a description to be one, where as this name was not published. Still waiting on a source.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:07, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * "specific epithet derived from anemone "anemone"" Seems a little bit like over explaining here? Why not just link the genus, or when anemone is mentioned at the end of the sentence?
 * trimmed Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:43, 25 January 2016 (UTC)


 * There is inconsistency in whether you say "I. anemonifolius" or the full binomial throughout, within sections. FunkMonk (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I initially thought one needed to use the full binomial to start a para (and was told it was needed to start a sentence), but looking online I found that the the general use is for abbreviation after first mention. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)


 * "Isopogon anethifolius is found along the east coast of New South Wales, from near the Victorian border" I assume this is a mistake?
 * Yeah, I was originally going to expand and nom that species but there was more on this one. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:40, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * "though broader than the related Isopogon anethifolius" Only appears to be stated in the intro?
 * See sentence #4 in Description section Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:45, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Doesn't seem to mention broadness? Or am I missing something? "Its flat leaves distinguish it from the terete (round in cross section) leaves of Isopogon anethifolius." When I think of "flat" I think of height, not width (would be "narrow" then?)... FunkMonk (talk) 05:01, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You're right - added now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:16, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 01:58, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Any news on the naked name? If not, I have nothing more to add. FunkMonk (talk) 14:23, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Support - all serious issues solved. FunkMonk (talk) 22:44, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thx, edits look fine. I can go either/or on but/though.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:44, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments by Sainsf
I happened to review this article for GA status. I think I had overlooked a few issues, which I must mention here:
 * I think "described" can be linked in both Lead and Taxonomy.
 * added now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:26, 25 January 2016 (UTC)


 * In Description ...compared with the 1 mm wide leaves of the latter species... needs convert template
 * added now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:26, 25 January 2016 (UTC)


 * In Taxonomy It gained its current name in 1809 when it was redescribed as the anemone-leaved isopogon (Isopogon anemonefolius) in a controversial work On the cultivation of the plants belonging to the natural order of Proteeae,... Is Isopogon anemonefolius the same as the current Isopogon anemonifolius? Very slight difference, but there it is.
 * this is not uncommon with names with compound genitive components - often in early works an 'e' or 'æ' would become an 'i'. I can't find a comment about it specifically as most botanists would accept it at face value. Will see if I can find something to put as footnote. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:13, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Very interesting. Amazing how you get to learn stuff while reviewing! Yes, I think you should add a footnote with the above explanation. Sainsf  &lt;^&gt; Talk all words 04:54, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Have added a general footnote detailing the rule. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:08, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Link variety (Taxonomy). Is not "common name" too common to be linked?
 * I was the one who linked that. Maybe because I'm not a native English speaker this term isn't too familiar (in a taxonomic context)... Not sure if my language has an equivalent, doesn't have an article at least. Feel free to remove if it is common knowledge for English speakers. FunkMonk (talk) 16:24, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * added link for variety - common name has a specific meaning which I think is interesting for layperson. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:26, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The thing is that I never saw "common name" linked elsewhere. Why not use "vernacular name"? Would you need a link even then? At least I have not seen it linked anywhere else. Sainsf  &lt;^&gt; Talk all words 04:54, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * "Vernacular name" is a redirect to common name and to my ears all intents and purposes a synonym I think. However "common name" is more accessible to lay reader. You are right in that I have not linked it much in other articles and would not be opposed to unlinking it here (i.e. my preference is to remain linked but not by much and if consensus was that it was redundant I would not have a problem with that. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:57, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * So should we wait for a consensus? Well, as for me, I oppose linking the term. Sainsf  &lt;^&gt; Talk all words 07:26, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, I delinked as neither Funkmonk or I care one way or the other and you feel more strongly. That's no problem. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:05, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Sainsf &lt;^&gt; Talk all words 16:12, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

I do not find any more issues with the article. Thanks and  for their cooperation. I give my Support on prose to this article. Cheers! Sainsf &lt;^&gt; Talk all words 14:25, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
 * thanks for your thoroughness and support. cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:38, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I can't see this being controversial! A few thoughts:
 * Comments from JM
 * "broad-leaved drumsticks" Is this plural or singular?
 * Used for both, in the manner of glasses, billiards etc. --Melburnian (talk) 06:49, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * "Its height usually ranges between 1 and 1.5 metres (31⁄4–5 feet), generally being smaller in exposed heathland" This doesn't quite work- "its height" is the subject of the first clause, while the plant itself seems to be the subject of the second.
 * Agreed - tweaked. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:08, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * "common name of drumsticks" How about "common name, drumsticks"? I think it would be words as words. (Perhaps something similar could be done with the mention of the common name in the taxonomy section?)
 * tweaked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:23, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * "The flowers appear anywhere from July to January" I assume you mean any time?
 * facepalm. fixed Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:08, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * What's a globe?
 * it's the woody base the flowers come out of. I'll have a look for technical terms Cas Liber (talk
 * I've used the wording "globular inflorescence" to refer to the whole structure and tweaked the wording around it. --Melburnian (talk) 11:31, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * "appeared in his paper On the natural order of plants called Proteaceae in the Transactions of the Linnean Society in 1810" According to our article (I think) the published version had a different title- as an article, it'd probably need to be in quotes rather than italicised, too?
 * The name On the natural order of plants called Proteaceae was published as a standalone, which indicates it needs italics. When called "On the Proteaceae of Jussieu", it was as an article in a journal and hence that title is in quotation marks. I've seen it referred to as either name. What I don't know is what the lectures were called. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:31, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * At the moment, the article reads "Brown's description appeared in his paper On the natural order of plants called Proteaceae in the Transactions of the Linnean Society in 1810"; my understanding is that this is incorrect. Perhaps "Brown's description appeared in his paper On the natural order of plants called Proteaceae, subsequently published as "On the Proteaceae of Jussieu" in the Transactions of the Linnean Society in 1810"? Josh Milburn (talk) 12:45, 7 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Aaah ok, see what you're getting at - good point/fixed. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:29, 8 February 2016 (UTC)


 * What happened to Brown's varieties?
 * I forgot to do this edit before. Both were synonymised Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:12, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * "around two months of being burnt in a bushfire" ?
 * facepalm. fixed Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:12, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * "to resprout for more intense fires" Again- I'm struggling
 * facepalm. fixed Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:12, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * This is probably just a personal preference, but I really don't like the table format for the images; Template:Multiple image looks much better, to my eyes.
 * Done. --Melburnian (talk) 06:49, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Maybe I'm being picky, but I'm not sold on the one-line paragraphs
 * Yeah. I had trouble shoehorning those into paras, which was why I didn't do it initially. I've had a go now but am at a loss with where/how to place the single line in the ecology section... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:05, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Hope this is helpful. Josh Milburn (talk) 15:47, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Images are all fine. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:45, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Support. No further comments. Josh Milburn (talk) 14:13, 21 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your input. --Melburnian (talk) 05:08, 22 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Source review
 * Everything looks OK. Spot check to follow. -- Laser brain  (talk)  22:57, 15 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Source spot-check
 * Fn 3c, OK
 * Fn 5, OK
 * Fn 16, OK
 * Fn 23, OK, but the search string in your link produces an error message. I had to do a new search by "Atylus anemonifolius".
 * Damn, that's timing out for me, which sporadically happens. Will put that on to do list once I can access site. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:50, 16 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Fn 33, OK. -- Laser brain  (talk)  23:08, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

-- Laser brain  (talk)  02:28, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.