Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of early-diverging flowering plant families/archive1


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

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 14 April 2023 (UTC).

List of early-diverging flowering plant families

 * Nominator(s): - Dank (push to talk) 00:34, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Image license info is on the list's talk page. Almost every list-link in "See also" is a featured list, so they might be helpful. We're not far now from covering all the flowering plant families. - Dank (push to talk) 21:01, 16 March 2023 (UTC)
 * PresN and I worked up a sidebar with links to the other lists. I think it will help give a sense of how the orders fit together, too. - Dank (push to talk) 03:17, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Comments

 * Usual faultless work, my only query is with the first words "There are around 27 families" - why "around" 27? That suggests there could actually be more or fewer, but I'm unclear why........ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:35, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * There's something in the human psyche that likes to think of parent-child relationships as known and fixed. But we're talking about events that happened over 100 mya. Taxonomists don't speak in certainties, they speak in probabilities. The "around" (along with the note at the end of that sentence) was meant as a general reminder of this uncomfortable reality. But I agree that there's a risk that "around" raises a question it doesn't answer ... I can remove it if you like. - Dank (push to talk) 14:22, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Could remove it, and just change it if the classification changes. Or change it to "27 currently recognised" or similar? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:49, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Sure. I went with the former. - Dank (push to talk) 19:04, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:14, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Aoba47

 * For this sentence, (The 27 families are generally placed in 9 orders.), shouldn't nine be written as words instead since it is a number less than ten. I believe you put it in numerals to match the 27, but it still stood out to me on my read-through.

I have read through the list a few times, and I could not find anything major, or even minor, to comment on for this review. I only have one very nitpick-y question, and once that is addressed, I will be more than happy to support this based on the prose. Aoba47 (talk) 23:35, 25 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Changed to "The early-diverging families are generally placed in nine orders". Does that work? - Dank (push to talk) 00:34, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
 * That looks great to me. Thank you for addressing this point so promptly. I support this FLC for promotion based on the prose. I had a fun time reading this list, and I appreciate the work you have put into it. Have a wonderful rest of your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 00:59, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
 * And thanks to you too for responding to the request so quickly. I'll keep an eye out for your lists. - Dank (push to talk) 02:40, 26 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Support on prose - I know nothing about this topic, but this list was engaging and informative, and took me down a rabbit hole of flowering plants. Excellent work, as usual, Dank. :) Krimuk2.0 (talk) 17:28, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
 * High praise coming from you ... I'm looking forward to your next FLC nomination. - Dank (push to talk) 18:21, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Support from Cyclonebiskit

 * Image review
 * File:Degeneria vitiensis.png is not licensed appropriately. The given source is the Ukrainian Wikipedia which lists the image as non-free fair use, coming from volume 5 of a Russian plant encyclopedia: Жизнь растений. Энциклопедия в 6 томах (Plant life. Encyclopedia in 6 volumes).
 * Image removed. - Dank (push to talk)
 * File:Canella winterana Tree and fruits (cropped).jpg (and its parent file File:Canella winterana Tree and fruits.jpg) seem a bit suspect as there is no attached metadata and all of the other user's uploads are otherwise exclusively from Canada. The deletion notices on the user's page are related to misunderstandings of copyrights from what I can tell and that is unrelated to the other images they regularly upload. I'm going to AGF that the user did indeed take this photo while on a trip.
 * Replaced. - Dank (push to talk)
 * All other images are appropriately licensed/sourced.


 * Review
 * I have no concerns aside from the one/two image(s). ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 17:47, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for catching those, and for the review. - Dank (push to talk) 18:58, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Forgot the . - Dank (push to talk) 18:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Everything looks good to me now, happy to support :) Excellent work. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 19:18, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll give yours a complete review soon. - Dank (push to talk) 19:44, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Source review passed; promoting. -- Pres N  13:23, 13 April 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.