Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening/Archive 1

New Project
I'm starting this project because the horticultural categories are rather disorganised. I'm fairly new to wiki, but not to horticulture. (Please help set up the project page!) As well as looking for experienced wikipedians, I'm also recruiting from web forums, where there are some people with great expertise and knowledge on gardening subjects. SB Johnny 14:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Is it proper form to simply delete a bunch of the boilerplate that's not being used? It's rather ungraceful at the moment... I suppose things could just be added back in later. SB Johnny 14:35, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Adding Category Tags
In the Organic Garden category, many pages are linked from the main article page, but do not have the category tag. Should they be added? SB Johnny 13:59, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Cleaning up Organic link pages
(Moved from the main project page) Clean up Category:Organic_gardening. There is also a page linked on the Organic_gardening page of related pages, which should probably go on the category page. That page is here: List_of_organic_gardening_and_farming_topics.
 * I disagree as the 'list of' page (albeit created by myself, in the days before we had wikipedia categories) is organised much more systematically than a category page, which is purely alphabetical, for further discussion see Talk:List_of_organic_gardening_and_farming_topics
 * I also think the list is very useful, and should be actively maintained. Future WP features, along the lines of Categories, may eventually make this type of organized page redundant, but at present, with so much spawning of "subarticles" and also proposals to merge, this gives a great overview of the broad topic that helps both in locating info (readers) and planning (editors). --Tsavage 18:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Maybe a good approach would be to put the category tags on the bottom of those pages as well? This would allow a nice redundancy.SB Johnny 11:55, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Just to add the "official" sentiments: Categories%2C_lists%2C_and_series_boxes. SB Johnny 16:20, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Subcategory for garden pests?
Might be good to have one... I've started putting some tags for garden pests to the Horticulture category. SB Johnny 16:02, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikibooks
I've seen several discussion pages regarding the "how-to" quality of some horticulture and gardening articles. Perhaps cleaning some of these up to me more encyclopedic would be a good idea, with links to wikibooks that can go into greater detail about how-to information? SB Johnny 10:30, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Articles for the Wikipedia 1.0 project
Hi, I'm a member of the Version_1.0_Editorial_Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing using these criteria, and we are looking for A-class, B-class, and Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Can you recommend any suitable articles? Please post your suggestions here. Cheers, Shanel 20:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge proposal
I though members of this project could pitch in at Talk:Pruning about the proposal to merge Pruning fruit trees into that article. Circeus 22:18, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

New wikibook (to ease transwiking)
I've created a new wikibook called A Wikimanual of Gardening on our sister site, in the hopes of clearing up the "how-to" problems involved with many of the plant and garden pages. I will watch this book and try to keep on top of it, but help would be greatly appreciated. For information on transwiking to this book, please see the chapter A_Wikimanual_of_Gardening/How_to_Transwiki_Information_to_this_Book

I'm cross-posting this on the Plants project as well. SB Johnny 17:22, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Native Gardening Societies...
OK, shall we list native gardening soiceties on the native gardening page or is there a list elsewhere (tried a wikisearch..) cheers Cas Liber 05:05, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Looks like a couple are there at the bottom as external links. Might be a list somewhere without a category tag, but if not, might be nice to have a separate page. SB Johnny 13:49, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

"Hortibox" template?
I've been thinking for a while now that some sort of box (like the taxobox) might be good to have for garden plants. Maybe the following fields:


 * Hardiness zones (and other zones)
 * Sunlight requirements (sun/shade/etc.)
 * Soil requirements (would be good to come up with some sort of standard notation, might need more than one field on this including drainage, fertility, pH, etc.)
 * Water requirements (some range between xeric and wetland)
 * Growing season (especially for food crops)
 * Chilling period
 * Propagation methods (seed, cutting, division, etc... again, good to have some standard notation)

Sound good? Am I leaving something out? Anyone know how to make templates? SB Johnny 17:02, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * heh heh, I just responded on your Talkpage but I'll add the relevant comments here:
 * MPF has brought up some points about Hardiness zones that I think we should consider. For his specific comments see my Talkpage and the Hardiness zones article. In short, it might be best to list temp. ranges rather than HZ ratings.
 * I'm wondering if we should include specifics about Growth Rate and Life Expectancy?
 * All the other info you proposed looks excellent. I'm excited about this idea and I think it could add a lot of useful info and some much-needed consistency :)
 * Aw dang, I was hoping you knew how to make tamplates! Any idea who we might turn to? MPF seems to have some experience...Doc Tropics 17:34, 21 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Managed to cobble something together. See it here.


 * I'm afraid I don't know much about designing infobox templates, but I was thinking it would good if the proposed hortbox were complimentary to the existing taxobox; ideally appended directly as a supplement to the taxobox. Is this possible? Strobilus 01:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

User Box
Hi, I have made a User Box feel tree to use it Template:User WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening

Any objections to me putting it on the project page? (Unsigned comment by user:Lynnathon)


 * None here... nice box!SB Johnny 10:41, 28 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I like it, looks great HelloMojo 10:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Lawn article
Hi there, I just had a quick scan through the lawn article and it requires quite abit of work. It needs to be globalised as at the moment it mainly focuses on United States lawns. Have a look and see what you think, I have put this on my to do list but would welcome any help...... many thanks Lynnathon 21:27, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Book category?
Hi folks! I wandered over while sorting out non-fiction books. I don't know what gardening-book articles may be lurking out there, but do you think there are enough books about botany/horticulture/gardening etc. to merit a sub-cat? Currently we have, but it's very underpopulated. &hearts; Her Pegship &hearts; 15:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Categories for deletion
Do the project members here have any constructive advice with regard to the following category that is up for deletion: Freshwater aquarium plants? David D. (Talk) 23:04, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Proposed merger of Native gardening and Wildflower garden articles
Hye guys, much of these two articles are the same and I think a bigger article encompassing the ideals of both is a great idea, there is a vote on on the discussion page of Native gardening. cheers. Cas Liber 23:22, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikibooks project started
Hi all,

Just in case anyone's been wondering, my horticultural writing has been mostly on wikibooks these days, as it's just a lot easier to write on gardening topics in a "how-to-friendly environment". If anyone wants to work on this, there's plenty to do in A Wikimanual of Gardening.

I'm mostly working on pages about weeds, sometimes transwikiing wp articles and modifying them (e.g.:A Wikimanual of Gardening/Trifolium repens), other times starting from scratch (e.g.:A Wikimanual of Gardening/Hydrocotyle sibthorpioides).

The "hortibox" template -- which ran into resistance here from the tree of life people -- is now in use by some chapters over there, e.g. A Wikimanual of Gardening/Iris sibirica. There are also templates for weeds, trees, and weedcontrol, more are in the works. -- SB_Johnny |talk|books 11:34, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Project directory
Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the WikiProject Council/Directory. This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you. B2T2 23:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Stablepedia
Beginning cross-post.
 * See Wikipedia talk:Version 1.0 Editorial Team. If you wish to comment, please comment there. ★ TWO YEARS OF MESSED  ROCKER ★  03:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

''End cross-post. Please do not comment more in this section.''

Proposed merger of Native gardening and Natural landscaping articles
Hey guys, much of these two articles are the same and I think a bigger article encompassing the ideals of both is a great idea, there is a vote on on the discussion page of Native gardening. Natural landscaping is probably the broader term though I have not heard it used as such in Australia.Cas Liber 10:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia Day Awards
Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 17:09, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

A very small stub
I would like to put foward the following stub, indoor plant culture, which at the moment is (not even) a stub and is not written in a formal style so if anyone would like to have a go at it. I have been thinking in nominating it for deletion because it does not give any relevant information. It has also been tagged for it to be transwikified to wictionary. I would like to know if anyone can improve this article or shall we just nominate it for deletion? Francisco Valverde 15:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

New Plant/Garden wiki
I've just set up a wiki just for plants and gardens. The articles on Wikipedia are by rule encyclopedic, and I want to create a plant encyclopedia and garden wiki with much more gardener friendly information, presentation. I am currently working on adding base material from Wikipedia itself, and then adding things like USDA plant zones, Sunset zones, propogation, common pests and diseases, and all the other types of things a gardener would want to know about a plant... so hopefully the sites will compliment each other with time. --RaffiKojian 15:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Have you thought about doing this on Wikibooks? A Wikimanual of Gardening has several hundred entries already (but needs a table of contents... use the categories to see what's actually there). -- SB_Johnny |talk|books 12:08, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Botanical Gardens
Anybody here know if there is a infobox for botanical gardens/arboretuims etc.? I've look a bit but could not find one. Thanks. Aboutmovies 20:00, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * None that I know of, but we could certainly make one, just a question of what sorts of fields we want (location, founding date, acreage, etc.). I've designed a lot of infoboxes on Wikibooks, so I'll give it a shot. -- SB_Johnny |talk|books 12:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Project banner question
I have recently created a banner for WikiProject Biology which has assessment parameters. I notice that your existing banner does not. Given the amount of overlap in the biology sector, and the concerns expressed elsewhere about the proliferation of project banners, I was wondering whether the members of this project would be interested in perhaps utilizing the Biology banner, with a "drop down tab" for this project, perhaps similar to the WPMILHIST banner. Doing so would permit for individual assessment for each project, as that is something the Military History banner does, while at the same time reducing the amount of banner "clutter" on talk pages. If you would be interested in such an arrangement, please let me know and I will work to revise the Biology banner to include the "drop-down" tab and make the other arrangements required for your project, as well as theirs, to have assessment data available. Thank you. John Carter 21:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)


 * We have a banner? As a general rule, I don't see anything wrong with having several banners on talk pages (they're work spaces, and banners (at least in theory) help the work along. Could you provide an example of how this would work? -- SB_Johnny |talk|books 12:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I actually didn't see a banner, but wasn't sure if there was one somewhere else. I thought I would look stupid if I said "your banner isn't..." and then was shown one that proved me wrong. A question recently at WikiProject reform among other places is that some articles have as many as 10 banners on them, which kinda clogs up much of the space on the talk page. That was one of the reasons that page was created. But there are several projects, WP:MILHIST and WP:AUSTRALIA among them, which use one banner which provides data for multiple projects. If you were to look at the Talk:Sydney page for instance, you'd see the one Australia banner includes a "tab" for WikiProject Sydney in addition to the main "body" for Australia, and categorizes the article by quality and importance for both the Australia and Sydney projects. Other articles might have more than one "tab" made visible, depending on how many other projects were involved. I think I could get the same thing done with the Biology banner, if some of the other projects were interested in working with it. John Carter 17:07, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Flowering date categories
As gardeners are often interested in the period when flowers are in bloom, I suggest categories be created with which to mark the estimated flowering period of plants. Proposal is at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Plants. I haven't found a Wikipedia article about flower garden design which considers blossoming time. I also think the Growing season article could use some expansion to help gardeners. (SEWilco 18:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC))


 * These categories are being voted on at Categories for discussion, with most comments apparently by people who didn't look at the linked discussions or are not flower gardeners. (SEWilco 02:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC))

Date cultivation in Dar al-Manasir
I ran into this page, and it's listed in the peer review, and so I thought I'd list it here, in case some more edjudificated people could look at it. Thanks for any help. Rhetth 01:35, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

May 2007: Category:Flowers
Rearrangement of Category:Flowers is being discussed in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Plants. As some gardeners are interested in the flowering part of the plant, perhaps some here would have something to contribute. (SEWilco 03:27, 22 May 2007 (UTC))

Wikipedia:WikiProject Beekeeping
I point out the existence of WikiProject Beekeeping for consideration whether it is of sufficient interest to horticulture to mention it. (SEWilco 17:16, 28 May 2007 (UTC))

WP:TOL template
I'm working on a proposal to subsume all the WP:TOL project banners into a single one. Please see WikiProject Tree of Life/Template union proposal and its talk page. Circeus 19:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Saving a Hibiscus

Hi my name is Rene and I live in northern KY. I recently rescued a very dried out Hibiscus from  a lccal store for $5.00 dollars. I brought it home and nurtured it and it was flowering and growing very well. Then a squirel dug it up and exposed the roots and it the plant layed on top of the soil for a day before I found it. I tried everything I could think of to revive it to no avile. Is there anybody that could make any suggestions to help me out? I would be very thankful as i hate to lose such a beautiful plant.

Please email me                                                  Mr_abstract@insightbb.com

Project Banner
Can you reformat the project banner? It's fully over 4X the height of the plants banner on the Weed article and is not very tidy looking. KP Botany 19:03, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Plus you miss your notice of the COM, and you can't see that it's a talk page with the height of the banner. KP Botany 19:07, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks like User:Wassupwestcoast created the template, but I spruced it up. I'm not sure how many of those parameters/functions will be used for this WikiProject, but I left everything else the same except the size of the photo. Do the members of this WikiProject want User:BotanyBot to populate the hort and gardening article talk pages with the project banner? I can also create the required categories and assessment page if needed. Oh, and what are your thoughts regarding template nesting (e.g. what we do with Carnivorous Plants)? Are all of the hort and garden-related articles a subset of WikiProject Plants or are a lot of them non-WP:PLANTS related? Cheers, --Rkitko (talk) 13:33, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * They're technically a subset but there are certainly plants and that are primarily or more the focus of this project than of plants in general, like all of the cultivars (I don't know if there is a WP cultivars, though). Where is an article that shows Carnivorous Plants nested, as I'm not sure I know what this means?  One useful thing about the templates, is it gives editors a place to ask a question, and, imo, it's more useful that editors be sent to the most specific place to ask a question, meaning carnivorous plants, not plants for carnivores, and hort and gardening for hybrid roses, not general plants.  KP Botany 18:25, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * See Drosera capensis for a nested template. WP:BANKSIA is nested twice. Indeed, what nesting does is it allows for a smaller project to maintain their project banner but reduce the clutter from higher up projects without removing any assessment details from those larger projects. I see you've also commented on the derailed TOL template proposal. I think I'm going to try and bring that back, but I need to create the terribly large template before I go back to convince people it would be easier. Cheers, --Rkitko (talk) 21:42, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I see the nesting. I like the ToL template, the second one proposed, that actually lists the overarching project, in the case of plants, better though, although this one would be fine, probably, if WikiProjectPlants were bolded.  KP Botany 21:47, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Help requested (Commons)
I recently added 17 images, constituting Commons:Category:Butterflies & Blooms (about an exhibit at the Woodland Park Zoo). There are some good pictures, but I am no good at all on names of plants. Many of these feature particular flowering plants and could use species-specific descriptions and categories, and I'm not the one to do it competently. - Jmabel | Talk 03:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Some plants are pretty hard to identify from just a photo. I'm reluctant to make an identification based just on that. Kingdon 19:04, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Aeroponics
The Aeroponics article is a reasonably informative one which covers many aspects of the subject. On the minus side, it reads like a promotional brochure (especially in places). There has been some sparring over this (over neutrality tags, or little edits here or there), but nothing too big yet. I'm not really posting here as a battle cry (at least, not a battle I plan on leading), but sooner or later I expect this to boil over one way or another. I added the article to this wikiproject, and am mentioning it here, but don't plan on doing anything else. Kingdon 19:04, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Plant ID help
If someone has time, could I get help identifying the tree and plant in Image:Cattail.jpg, Image:TreeFruit1.jpg, Image:TreeFruit2.jpg? I put what I think they are, but I'd like a proper plain and scientific name for them if I can get help. I made them PD at WikiCommons and they are high resolution. Thanks. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 21:18, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Identifying to a species can be hard, especially from photos, but I'll offer what I know. The Image:Cattail.jpg one looks like a grass.  As far as I know, every cattail has an inflorescence which is a sausagelike head of densely packed flowers, not a looser inflorescence as in this picture.  As for the tree,  I don't think I can distinguish between Bumelia, holly, Rhamnus, Aronia, and probably others (and that's Eastern North America alone; more if cultivated or elsewhere).  I'm sure someone more expert could narrow it down more than that, but there are a fair number of trees and shrubs with small round fruits on stalks and which have simple untoothed leaves. Kingdon 13:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * How about hackberry? Someone thinks it's hackberry. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 14:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Yup, the cattail photo is deninitely not a cattail. The tree is Pyrus calleryana, the callery pear. -- SB_Johnny | talk  14:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I won't disagree with callery pear (it was one of my first thoughts when I saw the leaves, but I wasn't so sure about the fruit). Kingdon 15:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

"Phragmites Australis" is what someone told me the grass is and that it's of European origin, not native to the area I found it in Virginia. "Callery Pear"-I went back there today and look closer at the fruit. The skin is just like what we called "Asian Pears" when I lived in Japan, so I'm going with these IDs unless someone has a better ID. I'll upload another photo and change the old photos names in a bit. — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 21:07, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Here are the new image names on commons, with a close up of the fruit. THANKS TO ALL WHO HELPED! If you need help, let me know, I'm an admin....Image:CalleryPearA.jpg, Image:CalleryPearB.jpg, Image:CalleryPearC.JPG, and Image:‎Phragmites Australis.jpg‎ . These are on commons as PD. Does anyone think they have Featured Picture potential? — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 21:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I don't look at enough feature picture candidates to say, but A is so-so (with parts out of focus), B is out of focus, C is the best of the lot, and Phragmites doesn't stand out from the background enough. Kingdon 00:53, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * That was my view too. I think C is pretty good actually, not sure if FP worthy though. What I like about A/B/C is that they're up close, a lot of plant pics are from far away and you can't see the detail. I may go back there and try for better pics. For some reason I really like this tree-;) — Rlevse  •  Talk  • 00:57, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Greenspun illustration project: requests now open
Dear Wikimedians,

This is a (belated) announcement that requests are now being taken for illustrations to be created for the Philip Greenspun illustration project (PGIP).

The aim of the project is to create and improve illustrations on Wikimedia projects. You can help by identifying which important articles or concepts are missing illustrations (diagrams) that could make them a lot easier to understand. Requests should be made on this page: Philip_Greenspun_illustration_project/Requests

If there's a topic area you know a lot about or are involved with as a Wikiproject, why not conduct a review to see which illustrations are missing and needed for that topic? Existing content can be checked by using Mayflower to search Wikimedia Commons, or use the Free Image Search Tool to quickly check for images of a given topic in other-language projects.

The community suggestions will be used to shape the final list, which will be finalised to 50 specific requests for Round 1, due to start in January. People will be able to make suggestions for the duration of the project, not just in the lead-up to Round 1.


 * General information about the project: Philip_Greenspun_illustration_project
 * Potential illustrators and others interested in the project should join the mailing list: greenspun-illustrations

thanks, pfctdayelise (talk) 13:04, 13 December 2007 (UTC) (Project coordinator)

Project banner assessment
Hi all! Couple questions for you. I was wondering if anyone on this project intends to use the /Comments function of the project banner or the /To-do list. As far as I can tell, neither are currently used and clutter up the template. I can remove them if everyone agrees, to be added back later when the project expands. Also, I monitor the User:AlexNewArtBot/PlantsSearchResult and see quite a few botanical gardens fly past my eyes. I haven't added them to WP:PLANTS in the past and User:Kingdon suggested this project might want me to tag those botanical gardens with your project assessment banner. Is that something that's within your scope? Thanks! --Rkitko (talk) 15:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, without any comments from users here, I'm going to be bold and make the changes I proposed and start assessing gardens for your project. Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 15:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Agriculture in Canada
Would this article be a part of this wikiproject? SriMesh | talk  03:54, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * There's a small overlap with this project's scope, but I think it would be best covered by WikiProject Agriculture. Nice article by the way! --Melburnian (talk) 04:24, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme
As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.
 * The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
 * The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
 * A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot  ( Disable )  21:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for Horticulture and gardening
Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 22:40, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Genus Curtisina
I am currently putting together an article on Charles Curtis (botanist), who was the first superintendent of the Penang Botanic Gardens. My sources say that Curtis was honoured by the genus Curtisina, so I was planning to create an article on this genus. On researching this, I find on zipcodezoo that there is only one species of this genus – Curtisina penangensis. Googling further, I came across this article, which implies that Curtisina penangensis is a synonym for both Dacryodes longifolia and Santiria longifolia. Back to zipcodezoo, I see that there are separate entries for both these species at and  respectively.

According to zipcodezoo, Curtisina penangensis is a member of the Sapindaceae family, while both Dacryodes and Santiria are separate genera but are both members of the Burseraceae family. I am mightily confused. Can anyone shed any light? Cheers. --Daemonic Kangaroo (talk) 07:24, 5 November 2008 (UTC)


 * You might consider posting this at WT:PLANTS. This hort&garden project isn't as active as the plants project. Just a word of caution about zipcodezoo, it's not an authoritative source. It simply pulls information in from several locations (including Wikipedia) and errors abound. I've found plant genera referred to as being in the animal kingdom, enormous amounts of synonymy reported as actual species, and many other errors. I'd stay clear of using zipcodezoo as any sort of reference or external link. Maybe in the future when they clean up their act. This is just a quick reply to help you maybe get a faster answer from elsewhere, but if I have time this evening I'll look into the species synonymy. We have some pretty good taxonomists over at the plants project who would be able to help you faster and better than I could, though. Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 13:12, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Cottage garden
The Cottage garden article is being considered and reviewed for GA here. Anyone who would like to help improve it, please dig in! First Light (talk) 05:50, 28 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't participate in enough GA reviews to really say how it stands up against the GA criteria, and I don't know enough about the subject matter to, without research, say whether the article is missing information or misstating something. But based on a first read and however it gets classified in the GA process, this is a great article and very much an example of the kind of article that we'd like to have (but mostly don't) for this WikiProject. My congratulations to all those who worked on it (especially ). Kingdon (talk) 17:29, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Hawaii botanical gardens
Hi. Are all the botanical gardens in Hawaii covered by the scope of this project? If so, I'll tag them. Viriditas (talk) 13:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I would think so. Kingdon (talk) 03:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I would assume so as well, but it isn't very clear on the project page. I'll start tagging asap. Viriditas (talk) 03:27, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

About tagging in general. Editors interested in horticulture and gardening are definitely the ones to ask for clean-ups, look-over, monitoring of botanical garden articles. I am adding this project's tags to a large assortment of European botanical garden articles being created by an editor. These gardens pop up in the AlexNewArticleBot lists, and I would like to show general Wikipedia support to the editor who is creating them by helping with any issues that arise. --KP Botany (talk) 09:36, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Some garden articles for development
SilkTork recently did a great job of merging and organizing some very stubby garden articles (Planting Design, Front Garden, Formal Garden, Residential Garden, Rock Garden) into Garden design, and some more stubby articles (Herb Garden, Vegetable Garden, Potager Garden) into Kitchen garden. Those two articles, Garden design and Kitchen garden now offer a lot of room for development to anyone interested, and seem a much better way of organizing the garden related articles. He also created a new category, Category:Types of garden, which helps to organize these and many other garden types. Horticulture and Gardening editors are invited to use this new category, and to help develop these two expanded gardening articles. And of course, feedback is invited. First Light (talk) 04:24, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes. I think organisation is a priority for this Project. And then assessment. There is much valuable work hidden away in isolation spots unrecognised, and it needs to be brought into the light and allowed to grow. I think this is like a garden gone bad. We have flowers mixed with vegetables and weeds and we can't clearly see the shape of the garden. We need to do some weeding, and some transplanting. Let's do it!  SilkTork  *YES! 12:07, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Horticulture and Gardening
There is no encyclopedic difference between Horticulture and Gardening. See. In the library system, Horticulture and Gardening are listed under the same Dewey number of 635. Our current category system either has articles listed under both or arbitrarily assigned to one or the other with no clear logic. I propose that we merge the categories together as one parent article termed Horticulture and Gardening from which we can have appropriate sub-articles.  SilkTork  *YES! 18:30, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, I'll buy that. The main distinction seems to be between horticulture and agriculture. Kingdon (talk) 18:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll set it up.  SilkTork  *YES! 12:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Horticulturists and Gardeners
The same for these as well. It would be better to have one cat, and if we have only the one (Gardeners), then somebody would create the other (Horticulturists), so we might as well have both together (Horticulturists and Gardeners).  SilkTork  *YES! 19:16, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I see you have set this up with category redirect. Looks fine. Kingdon (talk) 18:44, 24 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree with both of these. First Light (talk) 19:15, 24 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I went ahead with Horticulturists and Gardeners because there were few articles in the Gardeners cat, and it would be easy to undo if it didn't work. I wanted to see if any problems cropped up as I merged the two. No problems occurred, so I'll get on with creating the Horticulture and Gardening cat.  SilkTork  *YES!

Plant and Garden wiki
Just want to let people know that two years on, the work on http://www.plants.am is still going strong, with thousands of articles. Since Wikipedia is not a "how-to", this site is specifically a how-to on growing every single garden plant in the world. It is broken into plant requirements and statistics, cultivation, propagation, pests/diseases, cultivars, etc. All of the older articles are being totally rewritten from scratch into this format, and all articles will have links to Wikipedia by default in the new article template. Anyway, I hope some of you who are more interested in the "how-to" of things might find the site helpful, and maybe even want to contribute there as well. An example of a solid article showing the direction new articles are meant to take can be seen here: http://www.plants.am/wiki/Nerium_oleander - If you have any feedback, let me know! Thanks, --RaffiKojian (talk) 21:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * It's a nice site, and while currently it appears to pretty much overlap with Wikipedia, I can see where it does slightly diverge. I'm quite happy working here on Wikipedia, but I wish you luck with the site.  SilkTork  *YES! 11:05, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah. I see you've been adding links to the site on various plant articles. That is against our guidelines - External_links - "one should avoid .... Links to open wikis, except those with a substantial history of stability and a substantial number of editors." Looking at the site's recent changes page, there is only one editor. Your intention is fine, but the links are inappropriate and should be removed. Sorry.  SilkTork  *YES! 11:13, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi SilkTork, thanks for the feedback, I've replied on your talk page. I'd like to think Plants.am has a history of stability already and know the data is very sound (which I think is the main concern of the second stipulation) as the only sources have been reputable encyclopedias.  Here I'd like to point out that the concepts of the sites are very different.  On Plants.am the sections for a plant are the description, cultivation, propagation, pests, diseases and species.  That would include growing zones, soils, pruning time, style, etc.  On Wikipedia you would expect to see description, history, taxonomy, medicinal uses, production of commercial fruits, references in pop culture, nutritional values and species.  Wikipedia is really not supposed to include cultivation how-to, which seems to slip into some articles.  So all new and rewritten articles on Plants.am I think are quite different and useful for anyone who wants to know how to...  grow the plant in question.  Just like the wikipedia data is very useful for anyone reading about growing a plant who wants to know the history, uses, etc.   I hope the information on the sites compliment one another quite well... that was the intention at least!  --RaffiKojian (talk) 14:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I think those articles which already have appropriate external links, such as Banana and Asparagus don't need any more, especially as the link is simply to a site which has mainly copied information from Wikipedia. However, if, like Alstroemeria, there are few or no links to useful sources there might be an argument in keeping your link. The value of the link would depend on the unique information contained there which is not contained in Wikipedia. The difference, as you say, is in the instructions to how to plant and cultivate - and that is quite useful. However, in that case, your Alstroemeria article contains no sources, so the information ends up simply the opinion of the creator of that article - which is yourself. That the website is mainly yourself, this comes in the realm of Conflict of interest.

Your post here was the right way of doing things. Putting links to your site in various articles, even though well intentioned, is discouraged for various good reasons. You are falling foul of a couple of guidelines, and I could stack up some more which are related: Spam, Reliable sources, etc.

If you'd like to help out here in tracking down good sources for this project that would be useful. is one such source I found. There would be others. Regards  SilkTork  *YES! 17:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi SilkTork, I read all the guidelines you mentioned, and am basically confused as to whether there is any definite overstepping of bounds. I see all the reasons for the guidelines, and don't think I've broken the spirit (and maybe letter of them).  I will certainly be more careful about including the references to the 3 plant cultivation encylopedia's on Plants.am.  And I'd like to point out I've only linked to articles where my content is fresh and non-Wikipedia in origin.  But, since you seem to have concerns about all this, I guess I'll just take a break from Wikipedia in general for now.  Best, --RaffiKojian (talk) 18:01, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, I have concerns. I will remove the links as they are against guideline and are not adding value to this site. Please join us and contribute to this project when you are ready.  SilkTork  *YES! 19:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm also in favor of removing the links, since it's a 'wiki' that is mostly the creation of one person. I appreciate the site and the content - it really is good work - I just think it's premature considering the valid guidelines here. First Light (talk) 20:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)


 * The WP:EXT guidelines do involve balancing rather than clear-cut calls, but I would recommend letting other people (other than the author of the external site) decide whether the site belongs there. As for my own opinion of the merits, I'm having trouble forming a firm opinion, but I would tend to lean against including most of these, because the barrier for WP:EXT is pretty high. Kingdon (talk) 22:54, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I have now removed the links from articles. As part of my general clean up of horticulture I would be going through external links in articles anyway, as it appears there's too many, and a good number of them are very dubious. I'd also be putting find on the talkpage of every article, as that will provide links to a variety of sources. People can help out with the find template by putting it on every article they visit in the normal course of editing.

While going through RaffiKojian's edits I noticed that this is not the first time he has come into conflict with putting links to his own website -, so he is aware that this sort of thing is discouraged and unwanted.  SilkTork  *YES! 11:52, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * You know, there is a motto people use on this site, and that is "assume good faith". I assumed good faith with you, but I am beginning to seriously doubt that.  Of all the rules you've mentioned, I don't see any black and white clarity on the links I had posted.  You unilaterally decided to take them down.  You repeatedly misrepresented my edits.  I NEVER linked to my plant articles which repeat wikipedia content, only articles that have new content from 3 plant encyclopedias I told you I use.  You say my articles aren't reliable at all when I forget to include a reference to which encyclopedia I used, as if I'm inventing all this information about the plants.  You go through taking down the links I added to rather useful cultivation info, and you leave some of the most random, pointless links, saying that we should look into those too sometime.  And now you bring up a reference 2 years ago to where a link to my Armenian wiki, which I didn't even add, was called into question for being POV, and fail to note that the question of my Armenian wiki link on the Armenian Genocide article here resulted in a wide consensus for it to stay.  You brought that incident up as if to say I'm some sort of troublemaker or should have learned my lesson, and as if that has some relevance to an Alstromeria article being POV.  You also say I should have learned that "this sort of thing" is discouraged and unwanted. No, actually, the consensus was that the link *was* wanted.  I am a big believer in following the spirit of the rules, and in a case like this I think you are assuming some serious bad faith.  I'm sorry, I just feel like you are treating this like a one-man witch hunt, when there is no witch to be found.  I genuinely thought people would find more of the information that they were looking for when they originally visited these articles on Plants.am, information which Wikipedia, as an encyclopedia (not a how-to) does not allow.  I, myself expected to find that info back when I originally discovered Wikipedia, and when I learned you cannot have it on here, eventually started Plants.am.  I see a lot of wikis where cross-links are standard (like wikitravel).  Yes, they have more editors, but since I am firmly in the belief that the guideline to try to "avoid" (note, it says avoid, it does not ban) links to wikis that have a few editors is to 1) protect from POV and 2) to make sure the site is well maintained and not just a spam magnet, I thought it was not relevant to this case, since those were not the case, and the links definitely added useful outside information.  Anyway, I just felt I had to explain myself, because the way you have repeatedly worded things would make people who have not followed the links you post interpret things quite differently than they are, and I don't think that's very nice.  --RaffiKojian (talk) 17:46, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * However reliable your wiki might be, it still doesn't reach the bar for external links, since it's essentially a personal website at this time. It may become a true wiki at some point, but for now it's inappropriate to add links to your site. This opinion is coming from someone who thinks it's a good idea, and wishes you the best with it. First Light (talk) 18:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks First Light, I'm working quite hard on the site, I am just hoping for a bit of help in making it realize its potential! It is odd, the avoid linking to certain wikis guidelines, because in many cases, the same exact site and page could unquestionably be linked to, if it just weren't a wiki.  Anyway, if you come across some good gardening info or links that don't belong on Wikipedia, I'd love if if you plugged them into Plants.am! :-)  Best,  --RaffiKojian (talk) 18:44, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I wish I could - I have my hands absolutely full here. I've found that adding cultural preferences of a plant (sunny or shade, well-draining soil, frequent water, etc.) in a neutral manner avoids the 'wikipedia is not an instruction manual' guideline. If at some point your site does grow, I would still suggest checking in somewhere like this before beginning to add links again. First Light (talk) 19:00, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, and if you notice Plants.am has gained a couple of editors and has grown, and you notice a great article on it, feel free to check here if you feel it necessary, or just link to it if you're comfortable doing so! ;-) --RaffiKojian (talk) 19:15, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I apologise for upsetting you Raffi. My perspective on this incident is that I noticed your post, and went to your site, had a look at it, and left you an encouraging message. Then I noticed that you had been placing links to your site, and those links were not adding value and were against guidelines. I drew this politely to your attention. You disputed my view. I gave you further guidelines which indicated that the links were not adding value. You continued to dispute the issue, then - instead of removing the links - you announced you were leaving Wiki. I removed the links myself, and again left you a welcoming message. As I was removing the links I noticed that you had previously been involved in a dispute over linking. Forgive me for not looking deeply into the case, such is the nature of what we do here, we do not always have the time to examine things deeply, and I had already spent a fair amount of time removing your links which I had hoped you would do yourself. However, the impression I gained from seeing the previous dispute was that you were aware that linking to other Wiki sites was contentious, and that you would have learned that an appropriate approach would be to bring it to the attention of the WikiProject before adding them to articles. None of this is to say that I think you are a bad person, or that you are a trouble-maker. I wish you well with your site, and again I welcome you to work here on Wikipedia within this project.  SilkTork  *YES! 20:32, 7 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the apology, SilkTork. I don't want to waste more of our time on this (though I'm about to), and I appreciate the explanation, but you don't seem to understand really what it was that was upsetting.  I already complained about 3 comments you made because they were implying things which were bad, when in fact there was nothing bad there to be found if they were looked into.  Now you apologize, but in your apology, you go and twice say links to Plants.am add no value.  What on earth is that supposed to mean?  How am I supposed to react to that?  You can tell me you think the links strayed beyond guidelines.  You can tell me it's better if I clear the links here first.  But you CANNOT simply state they add no value.  Come on, man.  I don't need to go 2 years back into your edits (like you did to me) to see that you have royally pissed off at least one other person, I just need to go back 2 weeks.  I am also not going to poke around and try to find out what you did, or what secret place he found you making those comments about him, because I think simply bringing it up here probably helps you to understand that you are coming off quite judgmental, and not very constructive.  The plant articles I linked to had very solid cultivation information from a plant encyclopedia, which I'm sure many visitors will find useful, and in fact I suspect many of the visitors expect to find that information there, so the link is especially helpful to them.  It seems like you mean well, but when you insert comments into every message which can easily be interpreted as rather insulting...  it becomes hard to believe.  Eh.  --RaffiKojian (talk) 06:19, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Again I apologise for upsetting you. That was not my intention. I was giving you an explanation for why I removed the links. That is, I didn't remove them because I felt you were a bad person, or because I wanted to be mean to you, or simply because I was blindly following guidelines. I genuinely feel that they add no value, and would be a distraction to readers who would click on the link to end up in what is essentially RaffiKojian's personal website which mainly uses Wikipedia itself as a source. Of course you feel your own work is of value, but as the material has no inline cites, mainly simply listing Wikipedia as the source, and you are not a known plant expert, a link to your site from Wikipedia is inappropriate. We cannot be seen to be sending people to such an amateur source. And your site is clearly not a Wiki in the normal sense: as you claim copyright on any material that you haven't directly lifted from Wikipedia. I sympathise with your frustration, but it's difficult to avoid the observation that you are simply diverting people away from Wikipedia into a mirror site for which you are claiming personal copyright. Under your site's current copyright rules, anything I or others contribute would become yours to decide if others can use. Let me quote: "This entire site is Copyright (c) 2007-2008 RaffiKojian, unless otherwise specified on the article page, photo page or here." and "To use the materials on your website, either non-profit, educational, commercial, etc, is almost never a problem, but please nevertheless check with User_talk:Raffi for permission. You may use up to 25 articles from Plants.am on your website before asking permission, so long as you agree to display a noticeable link back to the page on Plants.am and agree to remove the materials immediately if requested to do so." The more I look into your site the more uncomfortable I am becoming with it. While previously I was supportive of having a link here from this project to your site, now I am questioning that. Where do you see the value of your site to Wikipedia readers?  SilkTork  *YES! 14:11, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I must say, I just don't understand you, SilkTork. Let me try to explain the whole concept, and what is being done very plainly.  Wikipedia articles are encyclopedia articles.  They cover a plant very differently than Plants.am, which is meant to explain how to grow a plant.  THAT is the difference, and it is a very simple concept I thought.  I also think that a lot of people who come to wikipedia, wanting to know about a plant, would be quite interested to know how to grow it, since I was one of those people.  It is a how to grow a plant article, and yes, it is not full of inline citations.  The sources are usually listed under references, not inline.  I would have to put a citation at the end of every sentence, which gets repetitive and silly, when the entire article is facts that I got from say, the Sunset plant encyclopedia, or the American Horticultural Society plant encyclopedia.  I guess I could consider doing that, if it's a general wide concern, but since nobody else has ever mentioned it, I don't think it is.  If you don't see the value of the information from those plant encyclopedias for people wanting to grow the plant, then I'm not sure how to respond.  I also don't see what issue is with the copyright status, something again nobody has ever mentioned.  Who told you a "normal" wiki is GFDL?  Wikis were around for years before Wikipedia came along and was GFDL, and I might add, the vast majority of the sites out there wikipedia links to are NOT GFDL, so again, what is your problem with me and my site?  I've put so much effort into the site already, that yes, I don't want someone to copy the site in its entirety and create a plants.za or something like that with all of my work.  Other than that, I can't imagine a scenario where I would refuse the use of the materials with a simple link back, but as it says, if people want to use more than 25 articles, I'd like them to check with me.  Wikipedia links to hundreds of thousands of pages where the material is copyright, just because I'm using a wiki script, doesn't mean it's not doable.  You have very rigid concepts of what a wiki has to be, which I don't share, and apparently wikipedia doesn't either, since so far as I can tell, the wiki article on this site does not mention licensing even once in the entire article.  You also can't seem to get away from the fact that much of the site is using Wikipedia information.  You seem to have left out the ONLY other text on the entire page you quoted here, that the articles from wikipedia are being SYSTEMATICALLY rewritten with growing information from other sites, and if you watch the RecentChanges on the site, you will see it is, indeed, true.  There are a growing number of these very focused articles on how to grow the plants, and THAT is the value I see in the site, and THAT is what I seek help in expanding.  Why are you so purposefully ignoring that third paragraph on the page?  Can you not see why I feel like you have some strange ax to grind?  That you are looking for excuses to write bad things about me and my site?  You can't even begin to see past the fact that the rewritten articles are a new and valuable resource on the web, you constantly zero in on the older articles that are using Wikipedia materials, with the requisite licensing info.  So since the copyright of the site is quite normal, and the links were never to wikipedia materials, and the new materials are all from rather authoritative encylopedias which are referenced under references, rather than inline, I *still* don't see how you can come up with such long and unfounded complaints about Plants.am.  You seem to be on a one man mission to cast negativity on a project that can only be a good thing.  Simply teaching people how to grow plants!  After all this strange scrutiny you have been trying to put me under, I do find it interesting that you have archived section Giano started on your talk page: "Your further lies and trouble making", as soon as I mentioned it, and much sooner than you normally archive.  Seems you don't like it yourself.  Well, I can't imagine what you're going to try to make into an issue about Plants.am next, but I'm pretty much expecting it since every single time you write back you add things to your list.  --RaffiKojian (talk) 16:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


 * RaffiKojian, the plants.am website doesn't meet the guidelines at WP:EL since it is a personal website. If you want a broader forum and more opinions, I think you should post your concerns at Wikipedia talk:External links. I notice there are similar discussions there. I think this discussion here has become too personally focused, and is becoming less and less about the issue of whether plants.am is an appropriate external link. First Light (talk) 00:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

You know First Light, not once did I actually protest the removal of the links, nor do I intend to do that now - here or on anther page. I have merely said I don't think the issue was quite as black and white as it was portrayed as. That's all. I was done with this conversation back then. Ever since that time though, I've been defending my site and myself against what are coming off more and more as personal attacks by SilkTork. This last message complaining about the licensing of my site, and saying the site adds no value was a perfect encapsulation of what I think has been an extremely negative stream of notes, one after another, from him, that I've felt I had to defend myself from again and again. I was done with this conversation a long time ago, but he always manages to widen the gash, every time he replies. I'm at a total loss to understand him, or his problem with me. --RaffiKojian (talk) 05:52, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


 * This just looks to me like one of many discussions on Wikipedia that don't ever give satisfaction, often between two people with good intentions, as I believe you two are. I think there are more productive things you could both be doing. First Light (talk) 21:07, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I, too, was going to suggest dropping the subject. Kingdon (talk) 12:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Botany in relation to Horticulture and Gardening?
Thinking out loud here. As I'm going through and tidying up I am wondering how we deal with the relationship with Botany. And how we would differentiate between a botanist and a horticulturist. I see Horticulture as a branch of Botany dealing with domestic plants - so plants that appear in a garden (such as roses) might be categorised under Botany and also under Horticulture in a sub-cat - Category:Garden plants. Is that useful? Or, as gardeners can put any plant they like in a garden, is separate cat for garden plants really that useful?  SilkTork  *YES! 08:34, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I think it's useful. The category should be put only on articles where it's mentioned that the plant is used in horticulture, in my opinion. I've had the same question regarding the addition of the WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening tag to articles that might be more botanical, but where the plant is used in gardening. I seem to remember doing that one time, and having a plant editor remove it. First Light (talk) 21:14, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Many floras (that is, books listing plants published by botanists) will say things like "this species is grown in horticulture". For me the relevant question is not whether the plant is ever, or could be, grown by people, but whether it is done with some frequency. This can be determined by methods like whether the plant is listed in garden books. Kingdon (talk) 12:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * That sounds sensible. So a plant that is mentioned in an article as being associated with gardening and is referenced to a reliable source (such as Roses, linked to ), would be tagged with Horticulture and Gardening Project on the talkpage and placed in the Category:Garden plants cat.  SilkTork  *YES! 11:39, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. &mdash; Delievered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:38, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


 * There has been some discussion about the naming of the taskforce, and it has been temporarily renamed WikiProject Council/Assessment working group, while the project space is being considered for deletion. The initial aims of the taskforce are to consider the place of A-class in the assessment scheme. Don't be put off by the invitation being worded for "Coordinators" - if anyone has a view they should make it known on whatever talkpage remains after the fuss has died down.  SilkTork  *YES! 16:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Prostrate shrub
Not sure who is watching this page, but Prostrate shrub is a new article almost of sufficient size for a DYK - I have expanded it but it is heavily Australian-focused. Any American or British gardeners are welcome to give other examples or expand page. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've given it a shot. Hope that helps! --Tryptofish (talk) 23:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Ah, you've reminded me, I've had some work to subshrub on my todo list for a long time. OK, done. Kingdon (talk) 01:58, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's well over 1,500 characters now. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:00, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Green thumb
Can we do anything with this stub I wonder....Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:06, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Gardening (or Gardener, although whether those two should remain separate is unclear to me)? Seems like a case of WP:DICTIONARY. Kingdon (talk) 02:18, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah - merge all three looks prudent..I rummage around and rustle up some templates. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I have set up a proposal to merge gardener into gardening and discuss at Talk:Gardening. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Plantpot ??
I have never seen this written as one word..I mused on a merge with pot plant..but that redirects to houseplant. Not quite the same. What to do I wonder....Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:58, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * If this were at AfD, I'd !vote for deletion. It's an unreferenced dictionary term (one I've never seen without the space), not an encyclopedia article. Can't say there'd be much else to write than "...a term used to described the pottery, glass, or plastic container for potted plants." The rest is fluff. Could we really say very much about the history(?), usage, construction, etc. of plant pots? Doubtful. Likely to remain unreferenced, too. Rkitko (talk) 13:51, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The more I think about it, the more I agree. I will nominate at AfD as it is a non-searchable term as it is not a dictionary word. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:58, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * PS: Now listed at Articles for deletion/Plantpot. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

More eyes needed on Ghost pepper article
There is an ongoing dispute regarding the Bhut Jolokia pepper article so I'd like to ask other members from this project to take a look. At the heart of it is whether the term "Ghost chili" or "Ghost pepper" are legitimate names for this pepper, apparently an academic paper published by a student from Nagaland University disagrees with articles published by National Geographic, Time Magazine, The Guardian, and a multitude of other major publications. Example diff:

So, what to do? Even if "Ghost chili" is a mis-translation, should we be removing all the references that call it by that name? I'm sure there have been situations in the past which are similar to this one and I want to know how it was resolved. I am taking a break from editing this particular article until I receive some community feedback. If possible please leave a note on Talk:Bhut Jolokia pepper as well. JBsupreme (talk) 20:27, 19 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Short answer is that it isn't worth such a spirited edit war. Common names are notoriously hard to track down. I wouldn't rule out names which originated from mistranslations (especially if the mistranslation in question was decades or centuries ago and the name stuck), but I wouldn't necessarily get all excited about a name which gets press in the popular media for a while (especially if it seems to not be used by people who buy, grow, or eat the pepper). If you can bring yourself to just ignore the issue, I suspect it will get sorted out eventually (if the ghost chili name is that important or widespread, I suspect someone else will add it to the article before long). If not, well, maybe you can suggest wording which reflects both the origin of the name (I didn't see a dispute about that) and a suitable placement in the article which acknowledges the existence of the name while also describing why it might be considered problematic. Kingdon (talk) 22:31, 20 January 2010 (UTC)


 * How has this been dealt with in the past? This can't possibly be the first example of such an issue.  Ghost pepper is the most common name by far.  The pepper has been receiving press for many years now under that name.  Major television networks, magazines, books, newspapers, universities, and even seed companies refer to it by that name.  Yet, all the while, one single editor has made it a personal crusade to make sure that name does not make its way into the article. (!) JBsupreme (talk) 06:36, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I took a look at it too, and my reaction is very similar to that of Kingdon. My best guess it that the page ought to end up with something like "it is frequently referred to as the "ghost pepper" (sources), but that name appears to be a mistranslation (sources)." But, that said, I would suggest not being too concerned about it, backing away from heated talk with the other editor, and just suggesting some sort of compromise wording that allows the "ghost" name to be mentioned briefly while also acknowledging the other editor's concerns. See what happens then. If the other editor responds by refusing to meet you part way, you can always open an RfC to attract more eyes. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement
This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 03:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Opinions needed
Tree shaping article has ungone a lot of editing back and forth. It is mainly about the word Arborsculpture and in what context the word should be used within the article. Blackash (talk) 03:26, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Who is involved?
Blackash (talk) 03:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Blackash (me)
 * 208.59.93.238
 * Slowart (has only been editing on the talk page)
 * 96.233.40.199

Please note that editor 208.59.93.238 and 96.233.40.199 are one and the same person. They outed themselfs in the section Recap "Please note that this IP address and 96.233.40.199 are used by the same person." Blackash (talk) 07:00, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

The different aspects of the dispute are happening in these locations.
Blackash (talk) 03:27, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Tree shaping article
 * Tree shaping talk page
 * COI Noticeboard

The help I have requested
Blackash (talk) 03:28, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I contacted three different editors who had edited on Tree shaping talk page, including one who had criticised me. I just asked for them to come and give their opinion, I didn't lay out any of the issues.
 * I have contacted Andrevan to ask for editor assistance NPOV needed to check my editing and to improve my editing to ensure that I'm editing from a NPOV. (He hasn't replied yet) I listed the in and outs what editor is doing what there to date of 26 January 2010. Of couse more has happened.
 * I posted what I believe are problems at Mediation Cabal

Summary
Basically these three editors are attempting to give undue weight to the word Arboursculpture. They are claiming that I have COI so they don't have to give reasons or to come to a compromise for their changes. Initially I said that I didn't see we had a conflict, but then I read the ICO article and this was my reply after that.
 * Having read the COI I can see that now the page has been change from Arborscuplture to a neutral, generic, and descriptive name we now may come into COI. As the page is no longer about one method of shaping but the art form as a whole. Fortunately it was never my agenda to push our method of shaping. My only agenda if there is one is not to have our work branded with someone else's methods of shaping trees. With that in mind I will continue to edit as I have always endeavoured to reach a consensus with other editors. Blackash (talk) 12:02, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

208.59.93.238 and 96.233.40.199 have implied I only edit for self promotional reasons. Check out some of my editing of related articles, I don't promote Pooktre, but try to improve Wikipedia in general. They have also accused me of micromanaging when I asked them for the reasoning for the change/s to the content. These editors plus Slowart insinuate that the original naming of the article was instigated by me. Which is not true. My reply to this was "I don't prefer Tree shaping verses Arborsculpture. Any neutral name would do. Tree shaping was changed from Arborsculpture becuse there is a method linked the word. Arborsculpture and Pooktre both have methods linked to their names and it would be inappropriate to use these as they are not neutral, generic, or descriptive. Richard Reames and now this editor keep trying to imply that we were responsible for the naming of this article. There was a consensus of quite a few different editors. Move from Arborscusculpture to Tree Shaping Blackash (talk) 16:11, 24 January 2010 (UTC)"

I refute the point, I do research and give quotes as to why it is wrong, I contradict what I believe the issues are (as they don't say why it can be a bit confusing) and find evidence to back up what I have said.

I have repeatedly asked them to give reasons for the changes. I have attempted to work towards a compromise, between their view and mine. Any changes I make are basically undone or they change the sentence to give more weight to the word Arborsculpture. Example they asked a citation, after three days they removed the content from the page. This content was related to the usage of the word Arborsculpture. Blackash (talk) 03:25, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

What is needed
In short I like some new eyes looking at the content before this editing started to voice an opinion on which edits are improving the content and what isn't. Blackash (talk) 03:22, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * How the page looked before these edits
 * How they edited last
 * How it looks modified between us both

Evidence of arborsculpture as a generic term
There's plenty of evidence of arborsculpture being used as a generic term. Please consider it before opining. --Griseum (talk) 03:18, 8 February 2010 (UTC) (same user as IP address used recently in "arborsculpture" discussions).

Gardening &/or Design ?
Hi, confused where gardening's boundary is in the 'design direction.' Was surprised the History of gardening article seems a good History of garden design. (much better the history articles connected to landscape architecture and garden design). However is does not talk about 'gardening' in the care & horticulture area. (not saying that's wrong, but that I'm confused.) Would like to help & be a part of team, but not sure where its focus. Thank you---Look2See1 (talk) 07:25, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Islamic gardens
We have too many overlapping poor articles around this area. Any thoughts on how many we actually need of Charbagh, Persian gardens, Paradise garden, Mughal gardens, & Islamic garden? Large chunks of this useful book are online, if anyone wants to knock them into shape. Johnbod (talk) 02:34, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I wasn't previously aware of this interesting subject area. I suppose there could be a case for proposing to merge some of these, although I don't see a serious problem with the status quo beyond the usual need for further page development. Could you, or anyone else, make a specific suggestion of what to merge? --Tryptofish (talk) 18:07, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * A discussion has started at Talk:Bagh (garden). I could see them all in one article, along with a couple of other stubs. Johnbod (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I'll start watching it. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

RfC & now RfM on Arborsculpture
We could sure use a few more eyes and green fingers to consider the facts and help us reach consensus at the article currently being called tree shaping, which started out as arborsculpture and which is the craft of cultivating and training trees, shrubs, and vines to grow into ornamental shapes, useful implements, and structures. It has a project tag for us here, and I got wind of it over at arboriculture back in April. I've since edited a lot, and also finally initiated a request for comment, surrounding an involved & covered artist-editor having maintained a commercially motivated hostile editing environment over a period of years. This yielded a few new editors now, including myself, who reached consensus in a proposal to change the page title to proceed with a requested move to consider the page move back to its original name, which may end up in mediation or not, depending on whether some consensus can be firmly established, and there is some. Meanwhile, the article is moving in new directions and getting much better, though it's a wrestle, and it may be due for a re-appraisal as to quality anyway. Thanks very much, if you can help us out over there. Duff (talk) 05:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Lilac walks
I am trying to start an article on Lilac walks. As a number of these exist around the country in Arboretums and Botanical Gardens pictures are not a problem. I first heard the term used by Father John Fialla who wrote "Lilacs" published by Timber Press so I'll be able to use that book for references but I would like to invite you'all to help out if you can. Andyvancleve (talk) 05:02, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: I've copied this comment here (from his usertalkpage) on behalf of Andy, who is working on the draft at User:Andyvancleve/Lilac walk. Thanks. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:39, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. It's a good idea. I'll reply more there. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:10, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Reference for Grafting
I was checking some references, when I come across this one Titled A History of Grafting at This is a fairly large pdf with lots of good info published by an experts. I thought this site may be of interest to your wikiproject. Blackash  have a chat 13:26, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Horticulture and gardening articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the Horticulture and gardening articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (&diams;) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:33, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Page on Terrace Gardens
Hi,

I have recently joined Wikipedia as an editor. I am extremely keen on discussions around architechtural desings and the variety of options they offer. One of the area where architectural designs play an extremely important role is Terrace Gardens as, a lot needs to be understood in terms of structural design of the building specially if it is a high rise, water proofing methods, the direction of the sunlight, type of plants to be used etc.

Some of the modern architechts are doing an extremely wonderful job of providing terrace gardens in their buildings. Kamal & Shibanee Sagar have designed some of the most beutiful apartment projects with terrace gardens, compost bins etc. One of their projects Windmills of Your Mind has terrace gardens in all of it's nineteen floors.

Our intention here may not be to advertise, but certainly the work of such architechts should be highlighted. There could be other names as well. These names will create a lot of interest amongst the readers.

Even if an external link is not allowed, a section on what is happening currently and who all are providing Terace Gardens should be there.

Thanks, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Total Environment Building Systems (talk • contribs) 18:00, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Can anyone identify these flowers?
The following image is currently at Files for Deletion: 2812--Flowers-Hearst Castle-2.JPG

The image was taken at the Hearst Castle. Can anyone tell me what sort of flower this might be? BusterD (talk) 16:46, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * They are a Fuchsia cultivar. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:36, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed - but I know very little else about fuchsias...Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:31, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Now at File:Flowers at Hearst Castle.jpg. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

The tree-eating tree
There's a kind of tree in China that looks like a banyan tree. It surrounds palm trees and eats them. It makes lots of branches that wind around it and fuze together again. It also has long brown roots that hang down. I have pics of it, but want to know what it's called because it's surely already an article. Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:50, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Some kind of banyan sounds the most likely. Imc (talk) 07:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

WikiWomen's History Month
Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:Horticulture and Gardening will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in horticulture and gardening's history, society and culture. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 00:51, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Subcategories "Type of garden"
User Johnbod left the following comment on my talk page:
 * "I'm having a great deal of difficulty following the rationale for many of your very extensive changes here. This area was already confused enough but your changes seem to make it worse. In particular, hiding all Islamic gardens under the very dubious & ill-defined category of Paradise gardens seems very unhelpful. The new category Types of garden by country of origin mostly contains articles on individual gardens. It is generally not a good idea to split up small categories between countries, as this forces those searching to look at each individual category."

My reply to this was:
 * "I have put the Islamic garden category back in "Types of garden" now. Is the page List of garden types not enough for those who are looking for something on one page? Perhaps it needs some expension and indenting? See also WP:Subcategorization."

All main articles for each subcategory were listed in the main category as well. In my opionion this was more confusing then helpful. Please let us know your opinions on these matters. Wiki-uk (talk) 18:06, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Compare also Wiki-uk (talk) 19:16, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Gardens subcategory of Parks - or vice versa
Looking at the table on Persian_gardens, I have my doubts if it is correct that currently ‘Gardens’ is a subcategory of ‘Parks’. According to me it should be the other way around, because a parks can be seen as public gardens, while not all gardens can be seen as a type of park. Any comments (agree/oppose)? Wiki-uk (talk) 16:03, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I might not understand your question, because I don't see those categorizations where you linked. I guess that there can be gardens within parks and parks within gardens, as well as either one without the other. Thus, I see them as two distinct things, rather than one being a subset of the other. Are you referring to Category:Gardens and Category:Parks? --Tryptofish (talk) 19:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am referring to Category:Gardens and Category:Parks, where Gardens is a sub category of Parks. In Wiki Commons it is called Gardens and parks Wiki-uk (talk) 11:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I understand better now. I agree with your logic, but I also recognize that changing categories can entail a lot of clerical work for relatively little benefit. I doubt that most readers would be either inconvenienced or confused by having the categories as they are already, so I guess it depends upon how strongly you feel about changing it. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:38, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Biodiversity of New Caledonia
Hello, could someone to work on this article Biodiversity of New Caledonia. It is very important in Paleobotany and evolution. Could you to work on this article, please?. It is a very important archaic species group in Paleobotany and evolution.Curritocurrito (talk) 17:38, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:HighBeam
HighBeam describes a limited opportunity for Wikipedia editors to have access to HighBeam Research. —Wavelength (talk) 22:49, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

List of Capsicum cultivars
Hi gardening people!! :) Some listed there have pepper infoboxes, some cultivar taxoboxes, and some I don't know. I don't know the difference between a cultivar and a variety. I'm wondering if you could give us some guidance at that talk page (I already posted there) about how to make things consistent, if that's possible. Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Covering every plant in Gibraltar Botanic Gardens as part of GibraltarpediA
I help run a project called GibraltarpediA, we are trying to cover as much as possible in Gibraltar in as many languages as possible. The project is based on MonmouthpediA, where we created 550+ new articles in 30 languages in around 4 months, Monmouth became the world’s first Wikipedia town.

As part of GibraltarpediA we aim to cover every plant in the Gibraltar Botanic Gardens and create QRpedia codes (a type of bar code your phone can read through it's camera that automatically takes you through to a Wikipedia in your own language) in the garden to give people easy access to the information. As far as I know the first botanic garden to do this. A full list of the plants is available here, I would estimate around half already have some information in English but many have an article in other languages already.

We’ve started the Gibraltar Challenge to reward contributors where you can win books and tshirts etc. We’d really love people from Wikiproject Horticulture and Gardening to be involved, you can find out more by clicking here.

Many thanks

Mrjohncummings (talk) 12:20, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Organic food
Much to my surprise, sources for the article Organic food have to satisfy WP:MEDRS. Recently I added a some text, based on a agricultural journal, only to see it removed due to it not being indexed by Medline. The guy doing this operates quite aggressive, so I need more people to check this article, as I think it is not neutral and hijacked. Your input please here: Talk:Organic food — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Banner (talk • contribs) 10:58, November 24, 2012‎
 * I looked there, and I think that those other editors (there are more than one of them) have a valid concern. When one gets into material about the possible health implications of organic food, yes, MEDRS most definitely applies. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:12, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

PROD for List of early spring flowers, List of late spring flowers
If any of you would like to address my concerns, that would be great.--Curtis Clark (talk) 03:24, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You are correct that someone needs to provide sourcing and geographical characterization, but a quicker issue sticks out when I look at them now. As someone correctly pointed out on one of the talk pages, it's major league WP:OR as well as inescapably imprecise to differentiate between early and late spring, so how about just merging the two pages into one? --Tryptofish (talk) 16:15, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The PRODs were contested. It would be possible to find references for some of these that give flowering times, but I think the geographic issue is bigger; some of these in southern California flower in winter or even late autumn. An accurate list might be List of cultivated spring flowers in northern Europe, northeastern North America, and southeastern Australia, but such a list might fail notability. I'd be happy for someone to prove me wrong, but I can't see any way to salvage the articles.--Curtis Clark (talk) 16:56, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * My suggestion about that would be to use the lead section of the merged page to define, with sourcing, the geographic areas in question, and to point out that the seasonality changes in other places. I haven't looked, but are there other list pages, for other seasons? Maybe if they were all merged into a single list of flowering plants, all of these issues could be made to go away. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:23, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Even a list of cultivated ornamental flowering plants would go on for pages (and then there would be issues with edge cases). Maintaining and sourcing such a list would be monstrous. If having this information is in fact useful, perhaps categories would be better, assigned only to articles that have reliable sources for flowering times.--Curtis Clark (talk) 20:08, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, you may be right. I looked at Category:Gardening lists. We also have List of early summer flowers – but no late summer! – and List of autumn flowers. Perhaps a combined WP:AfD is the way to go. --Tryptofish (talk) 20:27, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to consolidate discussion here.--Curtis Clark (talk) 23:33, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Organic Milk
Request for comments at Talk:Organic_milk The Banner talk 03:41, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Untermyer Park aka Untermyer Gardens
Just wanted to let gardening people know that this could be a really terrific article if someone wanted to put some more work into it. I fixed it up quite a bit just now, but there is much more that could be done without very much effort; it's a very interesting topic. These gardens have been called "American's Greatest Forgotten Garden", but they are currently the focus of much new work and restoration, so it won't be forgotten for very much longer! best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 18:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Categories - Gardens and landscapes by designer
I've started a discussion on the above topic at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Categories and would appreciate any input from members of this wikiproject. Thanks,  W a g g e r s  TALK  08:00, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Crop calendar
Please see: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Agriculture

Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:16, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Seed Stratification to their Germination
Dear gardeners: This old abandoned Afc draft was never submitted, but seems to have some interesting material. It's about to be deleted unless someone edits it. Is this a notable topic? &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 03:31, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes it is notable, but we already have Stratification (botany), so perhaps the information it contains should be merged with that? PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 09:24, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I've edited the draft so it isn't immediately deleted, though it's a bit "how-to manual" in style and lacks inline citations so I don't know which information came from which source. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 09:55, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your efforts. Now that it's safe from deletion we have time to figure out what to do.  &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 12:20, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Hortibox
has been nominated for deletion -- 76.65.128.112 (talk) 05:39, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Removing the Banner stating the need for more inline citations from the List of Companion Plants
Hello! Another editor,, and I have been very busy adding citations to the "List of Companion Plants" page. At what point could we have the banner stating that the article needs more inline citations removed? Do we just do that ourselves? Can this page be given a quality rating? Thanks- Jenjhall (talk) 23:40, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

List of soils
We need some images over there. If you have a camera and a shovel, or one of those new camera-shovels, please help.


 * Talk:List of U.S. state soils

Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 17:51, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dichlofluanid
Dear plant experts: Here's another of those abandoned draft article that will soon be deleted. Is this a notable topic, and should the article be saved? &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 14:25, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Fungicides seem to be considered notable - see here for ones we already have articles for. If more sources can be found, I'm sure the article should be saved. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 00:01, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I've edited it, to save it from immediate deletion. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 00:10, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, PaleCloudedWhite. I have added three refs from the German Wikipedia and moved it to mainspace. Since I don't know anything about pesticides, maybe you or someone else at this project can check them for appropriateness and place some of the references as citations.  &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 18:20, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet For Wikiproject Horticulture and Gardening At Wikimania 2014
Are you looking to recruit more contributors to your project? We are offering to design and print physical paper leaflets to be distributed at Wikimania 2014 for all projects that apply. For more information, click the link below. Project leaflets Adikhajuria (talk) 13:43, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

AFDs on community garden articles
There is an AFD about Hill Farm Community Garden (in Louisiana, in the U.S.), at Articles for deletion/Hill Farm Community Garden, which may be of interest. And there is an AFD about Community gardens in Omaha, Nebraska, at Articles for deletion/Community gardens in Omaha, Nebraska, which may be of interest. Please consider commenting. -- do ncr  am  19:26, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

"English rose"
I've suggested a split of English rose (personal description) into a girl and a plant article. See talk:English rose (personal description). Is this plant concept significant? -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 06:38, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Merge together all the dahlia cultivars
Currently there are individual articles for various dahlia cultivars, and each article is very brief. I think the information would be much more useful if someone could view all the cultivars in a single article, like has been done for garden roses.

Here are the individual dahlia articles I'm talking about:
 * Dahlia 'Akita'
 * Dahlia 'Alfred Grille'
 * Dahlia 'Apache'
 * Dahlia 'Arabian Night'
 * Dahlia 'Babylon Bronze'
 * Dahlia 'Babylon Pink'
 * Dahlia 'Bishop of Llandaff'
 * Dahlia 'Bora Bora'
 * Dahlia 'Bridge View Aloha'
 * Dahlia 'Chat Noir'
 * Dahlia 'Mrs Eileen'
 * Dahlia 'Moonfire'

I'd appreciate any thoughts on this. Thanks. Gccwang (talk) 05:23, 24 August 2014 (UTC)


 * If any cultivar is individually notable it should have its own article, as is the case with any article subject. If there are sufficient cultivar articles there is a case for additionally creating List of Dahlia cultivars. The comparison with roses is flawed - garden roses doesn't list all cultivars, and many cultivars have their own articles (e.g. Rosa Peace, Rosa Iceberg). PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 08:25, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I took a look at each of those pages, and it looks to me like Dahlia 'Bishop of Llandaff' is different from the others in terms of notability. I think there is a reasonable argument for a standalone page for just that one. All of the others (with the possible exception of Dahlia 'Moonfire', but I am not sold on that one) seem to lack evidence of notability (very, very different from, for example, Rosa Peace), and also look like copy-paste jobs that run afoul of WP:NOTHOWTO. If someone wants to start a formal merge discussion, I'll support it. --Tryptofish (talk) 14:37, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

In re: to User:Tryptofish I created a merge discussion at Talk:List_of_%27%27Dahlia%27%27_cultivars Gccwang (talk) 07:55, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Comment on the WikiProject X proposal
Hello there! As you may already know, most WikiProjects here on Wikipedia struggle to stay active after they've been founded. I believe there is a lot of potential for WikiProjects to facilitate collaboration across subject areas, so I have submitted a grant proposal with the Wikimedia Foundation for the "WikiProject X" project. WikiProject X will study what makes WikiProjects succeed in retaining editors and then design a prototype WikiProject system that will recruit contributors to WikiProjects and help them run effectively. Please review the proposal here and leave feedback. If you have any questions, you can ask on the proposal page or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you for your time! (Also, sorry about the posting mistake earlier. If someone already moved my message to the talk page, feel free to remove this posting.) Harej (talk) 22:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

WikiProject X is live!


Hello everyone!

You may have received a message from me earlier asking you to comment on my WikiProject X proposal. The good news is that WikiProject X is now live! In our first phase, we are focusing on research. At this time, we are looking for people to share their experiences with WikiProjects: good, bad, or neutral. We are also looking for WikiProjects that may be interested in trying out new tools and layouts that will make participating easier and projects easier to maintain. If you or your WikiProject are interested, check us out! Note that this is an opt-in program; no WikiProject will be required to change anything against its wishes. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you!

Note: To receive additional notifications about WikiProject X on this talk page, please add this page to WikiProject X/Newsletter. Otherwise, this will be the last notification sent about WikiProject X.

Harej (talk) 16:57, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Food Not Lawns
Hi! I am new at Wikipedia but it is super fun and exciting!

I posted Food Not Lawns, as a meme, onto Wikipedia, but there are issues about me as author/founder being the only person who has written the article. I do believe that Food Not Lawns, both as a meme and as an organization, are an important part of the gardening, horticulture, sustainability sections of wikipedia, and also Food Not Lawns directly connects to tFood Not Bombs and the Anarchist labyrinth there.

Would anyone consider adding your two cents to the entry? That would be great!

Food Not Lawns

HeatherJoFlores (talk) 08:12, 23 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! I made some basic edits to make the page consistent with Wikipedia style, and I put it on my watchlist. I would suggest that more sources, independent of Food Not Lawns, will be needed in order to establish what Wikipedia calls the notability of the page. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:49, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Trade designation template
Please see Template talk:Trade designation. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  23:59, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Seasons
Planting season and Sowing season have been nominated for deletion -- 70.51.200.135 (talk) 04:39, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Create "Defoliation of Plants" article?
On the Defoliant page it mentions how defoliation is used to aid in harvesting cotton plants (it's used to increase the yield, efficiency and quality), however it doesn't have much information about it, and I'm not sure if that would even be appropriate to add a lot of information about defoliation to the Defoliant stub. I thought it might be appropriate to make a new article about "Defoliation of Plants" to describe how this process is used with cotton plants, as well as how it's used for many other species of plants/crops. What do you think? Should I start this as a new article (with citations from journals of course), or would it be better to add more information to the Defoliant page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plantlady223 (talk • contribs) 03:06, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

Commons:Photo challenge Gardening
FYI: commons:Commons:Photo_challenge/2016_-_October_-_Gardening--Alexmar983 (talk) 03:09, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Expert attention
This is a notice about Category:Horticulture and Gardening articles needing expert attention, which might be of interest to your WikiProject. It will take a while before the category is populated. There might be as few as one page in the category, or zero if someone has removed the expert request tag from the page. &thinsp;&mdash; Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)&thinsp; 04:12, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for starting this. I've watchlisted the category, not that I'm really an expert. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:10, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Importance rating
I find the rating of articles currently highly arbitrary. Why is Dahlia high priority, Peony low, and why is Rose not rated at all? Why is Enid A. Haupt top priority (never heard of her before) and is André Le Nôtre, only the creator of the gardens of Versailles, not even identified as part of the Project? Should articles that are and should be part of the project not be identified and their priority rated in a concerted action? I'd be willing to give it a go, but only if there is no opposition. Dwergenpaartje (talk) 17:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry for replying so long after you left the message, but I consider importance ratings to be no big deal, because they are of no importance to readers, but are simply a tool within a WikiProject to track pages of interest and to assess how much attention a given page might need. So that means you should feel free to change those ratings. And I think that the reasons for changes that you gave here are good ones, so it's fine with me if you go ahead with it. Thanks. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:14, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Could use some help
Hello, I am looking for some help concerning the toxicity of a plants in the genus Colchicum. Sorry if this is not the right place to ask (I was not sure). 143.176.56.102 (talk) 09:43, 26 October 2017 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  12:50, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Discussion at Talk:Colchicum.
 * Thank you Tryptofish for providing the paper and Berean Hunter for providing the download location. This request can now be closed :) 143.176.56.102 (talk) 09:50, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Gardens of Monticello
Hi, someone hanging around willing to tak~e a look at the external links section? It loks weird? Thank you for your time. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lotje (talk • contribs) 11:16, March 6, 2018 (UTC)


 * ✅. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:37, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Topic experts needed for redirect discussion
Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2018_June_28 could use additional input from topic experts to resolve a disputed redirect situation. Thanks in advance for any feedback in the redirect discussion. GermanJoe (talk) 06:03, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Should Flower arrangement, Flower arrangements, Flower arranging, Floral arrangement and Floral Arrangement redirect to Floral design, Floristry or somewhere else? Your opinions would be appreciated at Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 June 29. Thryduulf (talk) 22:15, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Sissinghurst Castle Garden
This article, which needs a lot of work, is currently rated as of Low Importance on the Horticulture and Gardening project scale. That seems a very odd rating for one of the world's most famous gardens. I propose to change it to High, unless there are any objections. KJP1 (talk) 07:47, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure, no big deal, no objection from me. --Tryptofish (talk) 17:27, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Excellent - I think there may well be an FA in this. KJP1 (talk) 19:20, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Proposed renaming to lower case "gardening"
This project's articles are already categorised by importance and quality using lowercase "gardening", see Category:Horticulture and gardening articles by importance and Category:Horticulture and gardening articles by quality, so it would not be difficult to change the project name and a few other categories to match that naming format.

Following a suggestion at WP:CFDS, I therefore propose renaming this project from WP:WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening to WP:WikiProject Horticulture and gardening.

Please comment below with "support" or "oppose", preferably adding a rationale in the latter case. – Fayenatic  L ondon 14:30, 4 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I'm ambivalent about it, and would like to know whether any other editors have strong opinions one way or the other. I guess I could say that I regard it as a minor issue, but I'm aware of other WikiProjects that use capitalization instead of sentence case, and I am mildly opposed to having category-space conventions dictate what we do in other namespaces. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:10, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Ah, I wasn't clear as to the rationale. I believe most WikiProjects use sentence case for the project name, and it looks better e.g. within the banner for expert needed, so I recommend it here. The relevance of the existing category names is that renaming a WikiProject usually requires a great deal of housekeeping to rename categories and templates, but that (fairly pointless) work would not be required in this case. – Fayenatic  L ondon 22:20, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, I understood completely, but thanks for the thoughtful follow-up. Anyway, I'm persuadable if other editors think differently. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:41, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * any ideas for getting responses from other editors? – Fayenatic  L ondon 20:56, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Hmm, as editors I've seen on related pages fairly recently, I'll ping:, , . That's about all I can think of. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:02, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I have no strong opinion either way. The three WikiProjects with multiple words in the name that I invoke most frequently are capitalized (Horticulture and Gardening, Tree of Life, Amphibians and Reptiles), so that is what I'm used to, but I have a heck of a time remembering the capitalization for WikiProjects I refer to less frequently. If sentence case is more standard, I have no objection to a change, but I will have to retrain myself for the three projects I'm used to. Plantdrew (talk) 03:36, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Before I edited Wikipedia, I believed that title case is for titles, but that's not how Wikipedia's articles are presented, and whether or not its Wikiprojects use it also is beyond my care, particularly as they remain presented as WikiProjects (capital letter unnecessarily inserted within middle of word). PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 07:28, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Having the 'g' as lower case looks really odd to me but I am not hugely fussed on the issue. I might point out that the two words overlap enough to lead me to question why we need both anyway Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:24, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks everyone for the replies. As much as I don't want to draw attention to it, the Aquarium Fishes project also uses capitals. It's not clear to me whether or not the sentence-case requirement applies only in mainspace, or also in project space. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:09, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!
A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.
 * – Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Sissinghurst Castle Garden again
I'm planning to expand this article, with a view to FAC. It has an interesting mix of horticultural, historical and architectural aspects, and there's an abundance of source material - much of which I have. Sadly, I'm no gardener, and I think the article would benefit greatly from the input of an editor who knows about plants/horticulture. I've some experience of working collaboratively on FAC articles and I would be really interested in working with an editor with a horticultural focus. I think there's a fairly simple split between the history/architecture and the garden that would lend itself to a collaborative approach. If the idea appeals, just drop me a note, here, on my Talkpage, or on the article's Talkpage, where I've copied this message. KJP1 (talk) 07:51, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And today, TFA. Wiki's wonderful when it works. KJP1 (talk) 14:30, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

List of garden plants to feed honey bees in Canada up for deletion

 * 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 15:49, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 15:49, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Usage of word 'landscaping'/'landscape'
I want to merge 4 articles about sustainable gardening, and title it Sustainable gardening. If I understand it correctly, gardeners in the USA like to call themselves "landscapers". Am I wrong? Discussion? In the discussions on the various talk pages some people feel landscaping pertains to municipal grounds, and gardening to home gardens, but then in that case the articles are mixed up, with the text at Sustainable gardening 100% about (being accredited for) designing municipal green spaces and that at Sustainable landscaping 95% about constructing home gardens. As the terminology is confused, I advocate use of the more ubiquitous and unambiguous "gardening". I have also rewritten the landscape-scale conservation article; in that case, and in regards to the articles Landscape and Landscape ecology, an even larger unit of land is referred to. This usage also conforms to the original German/Dutch sense (in which "landscape architect" comes across as ridiculously pompous). The best sources (all American) in Sustainable landscaping go so far as to refer to a portion of garden as a "landscape", i.e. a green roof or a rock garden. The other articles I want merged with this are Sustainable landscape architecture (devoid of references) and Sustainable planting (confused about subject matter, should be chopped up and distributed among valid articles). Most of the articles on such subject matter were written by either someone in 2006 (he didn't feel references were necessary) or someone else in 2009 (who previously wrote a book on the subject and wanted to promote it), the text has largely stayed the same since then, hence the problematic sourcing to these opinions. So, let's hear it: Leo Breman (talk) 13:06, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Typical use of these words in the USA:
 * "Landscaping" usually refers to making a property more interesting, such as changing an all-grass yard into one with plant beds for flowers or shrubs, planting hedges or trees. Landscaping also refers to improvement of outdoor hardscape elements such as walkways, retaining walls, patios, walls, fences, etc.
 * It is rare that a home owner calls himself a "landscaper", but he may engage in "landscaping" to improve his own home. "Landscaper" usually refers to a commercial company or person who hires out to put in plants and make your yard or garden look nicer. The homeowner is usually the client; the landscaper is the service provider.
 * "Gardening" usually refers to the activity of tending plants.
 * "Gardener" usually refers to a person who tends plants in their own yard or garden. It could be someone who grows vegetables or someone who has a well-landscaped yard that needs tending (weeding, dividing, replanting, etc.). It is rare for anyone commercially to refer to themselves as a gardener.
 * In the UK, I understand the word "garden" to refer to the outdoor space of a home and that in the UK they rarely use the word "yard". In the USA, the "garden" is more likely to refer specifically to the "vegetable garden" area, because most USA homes have what we call "yards" (predominantly lawns). I would say that less then 5% of USA home actually have vegetable gardens, and most people do "yard work" (mowing grass, raking leaves, and maybe trimming a hedge twice a year) instead of "gardening".
 * — Normal Op (talk) 14:07, 26 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Okay, Normal, that largely conforms to my thoughts on usage in the USA. Thanks for responding. Noted that people in the USA hiring themselves out for routine maintenance such as pruning also call themselves "landscapers". So for the purposes of Wikipedia these terms are basically synonymous. Any thoughts on merging and title of subsequent article? Leo Breman (talk) 16:58, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Competition, rivalry, happening at Wikipedia ?
Hi. I am very disconcerted and have to see me very offended and very insulted. There are 2 articles: No-dig gardening and No till farming. (Ignoring the titles in other terms: Organic horticulture (redirect from Organic gardening), Regenerative agriculture, and surely more. I did an own one for my needs and connectivities, No till garden. It first was nominated to speedy deletion, by the author of No-dig gardening. I contested, without success. Today the nominating had gone for some hours, then was nominated again for speedy deletion, reasons: hoax and vandalism. But no way to contest, because of taken away again this message and my title redirected to the title No-dig gardening. Without help in Teahouse I would not even have the knowledge, my article still exists and having so far still access to it, without a link. Thanks a lot to the Teahouse.

Competition, rivalry: is NO support for a knowledge database. It is just the opposite. Thanks the interesst. --Visionhelp (talk) 22:18, 10 June 2020 (UTC)


 * , Wikipedia doesn't like duplicate articles or two very, very similar ones. (See wiki policy Content forking for more explanation.) I recommend that you edit the No-dig gardening article. The last version of your article is still available for viewing at this link. Normal Op (talk) 22:52, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Normal Op, thanks the reaction. 2 similar existing is OK ? But 3 not ? This is not clear rules, where one can work with, please. Editing in an article I do keep me back, from very bad and unnice experiences. I can do notes in "Talk". But at behaviour as this from the author of No-dig gardening, this for me is a clear sign (alarm) to deny this contact at all. So what ? Alone the permaculture ideology ´propagating´ there, and wikipedia in parts is propagating always with, is very against my prefering to deny ideology at all. There is no coming together possible. And the claims are very different. To "No-dig gardening" ?: Why not to Regenerative agriculture, or Organic horticulture, or No till farming ? I have a big work with my view to this topic. The article is in progress. But stopped now. I do not go on editing at this stadium of the article. I am thinking of an other title, but will not be easy and must not be successful. And a possible lobbyism: where being amazed and convinced but overjumping just the truths and being disrespectful (discrediting and so on), this are 2 kinds of lobbyism, please. Thanks. "duplicate articles" ?: till and dig is double ? Garden is double. ´OK.´ And to redirect ´my´ term to his article (without my permission), which leads to hiding and surpressing mine with, is just clear to call ABUSE, please ! --Visionhelp (talk) 08:56, 11 June 2020 (UTC)


 * , I am not familiar with the editors or their reason why they redirected "no till" to "no-dig". I was only trying to explain why they might have done that. Your article appeared to be incomplete; a work in progress. Please look at this article (Drafts) which describes where you can create, edit and grow an article without other editors interfering with your process. I recommend that you create your new article in "draft space". It seems that English is not your first language, and it is difficult to understand everything you are trying to communicate. I fear that your English skills will also be a disadvantage to your editing smoothly in English Wikipedia. I recommend you find someone who can be a mentor for you in Wikipedia; someone who understands your language and English. They can help to guide you. Normal Op (talk) 15:57, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Normal Op, my article WAS just in the beginnings, in the meanwhile it did become more saying now. But I may doubt this. The second nomination to speedy deletion was saying hoax and vandalism. This now I MAY call back hoax and vandalism. English is not my native language. But using in my native language already easy and good fast understandable words for everybody is a neverending work I do, and this for in english, too. Very in the article. And even in german I have to read, german is not my native language, from but just NOT WANTING to understand what I am saying. So what ? Reason for redirect: The author of the site to redirected is the one, who nominated to speedy deletion. This nomination was removed at about 11 o´clock AM yesterday, wednesday. At about 6 o´clock PM it was nominated again for speedy deletion, and after this, suddenly very fast redirected to the first nominator´s article site. (My english in the article can not be a problem, I am sure.) The draft-page, I will look at it and check how to handle this. Thanks for now. All the best. "Difficult to understand" ? Example, please ? All the best. --Visionhelp (talk) 16:38, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I am very sorry, Normal Op. There are very different views to (from ´No-till farming´) from food self-providing to ´being able, having a GOOD life from a farm´, and there is a very difference from dig to till. (I am still realizing this, after could not really understand it until these days now, for me this very difference, and it is not easy even to remind me of it, when needed. Because it seems so near together, but it is just not.) So I have to persist on ´Not till garden´, because I do MEAN ´not till´, and not ´not dig´, please. But I have to admit, I cannot (and I do not) mean the garden, it is meant the garden soil, the garden ground. Hm. --Visionhelp (talk) 19:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

mulch layer soil, mulch layer system (no till garden).
Hello. Is anyting wrong with my english, which is not my native language, in the Draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Visionhelp/sandbox ?

The reaction of claiming this from the ´Teahouse´ does very reject me: "Base: a philosophy is not CLEAR an ideology, but permaculture yes".

The (my) article fits to ´Project tasks, 4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Organic_gardening´. Therefrom I should have posted instead of in the ´Teahouse´ directly here. But I fear, I will here not find better reactions, sorry. So what then ? OK.

In "Talks" my english CAN be not so well, from being upset, if. And trying to say what I have to say, but have to say it respectfully, despite of being emotional, but entirely in the thing and clear and not offending at all ! But to do it as I can in german, I will never have or reach the word-treasure and the insight as requirement, which word does who understand how, and which words have quite fast misunderstanding double meanings possible and misleading.

But not in the article. Then even help couldn´t help. Because a word in this terracing has quite another nuance as a word with the exact same meaning but with an other nuancing. From this I have to use in english still more the most easiest words as already in german, to say all CLEAR and good and fast and easy understandable. And not nuanced, so far as possible at all.

If now no question to You is to find, OK. I just do not ask ! Visionhelp (talk) 14:41, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Shute House, Donhead St Mary
A new article has recently been created on Shute House in Wiltshire. The house is most notable for its gardens by Sir Geoffrey Jellicoe. They are only open for group visits by prior written appointment. The article would be greatly improved by some photographs of the gardens. Are there any editors who have been fortunate enough to visit and could upload some images? KJP1 (talk) 07:05, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I've never been and just had a go at searching Commons for it, but didn't turn anything up—sorry :( AleatoryPonderings (talk) 17:57, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * - Thanks so much for having a look. But you’re right, nothing on Commons, nothing on Geograph. It’s a bloody exclusive garden! KJP1 (talk) 21:56, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Of course :) I detest exclusive gardens and parks! I recall walking past Gramercy Park once and fuming with rage …… AleatoryPonderings (talk) 21:59, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Garden writing
Created garden writing last night, but I'm no expert. Any thoughts/contributions/ideas welcome! I was confused that I didn't turn up anything good in secondary sources about Vita Sackville-West, so she's a somewhat glaring omission from the article at present. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 17:59, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Me again. You might want to have a look at Sissinghurst Castle Garden. Tryptofish and I dug up a few good V.S-W quotes. I have all the books from when we took it to FA, so I shall check it out. KJP1 (talk) 22:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! Will do :) AleatoryPonderings (talk) 22:13, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Proposal to merge pot farming to container garden
Hello. I've proposed the merge of pot farming to container gardening and would appreciate input from others. There is a discussion section started at Talk:Container garden. Thank you! Dinanderie (talk) 00:26, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Herb Society of America
Hello, I recently made an article for the Herb Society of America. It is a work in progress. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you! Thriley (talk) 03:26, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Sandbox organiser
Hi all

I've been working on a tool for the past few months that you may find useful, especially if you create new articles. Sandbox organiser is a set of tools to help you better organise your draft articles and other pages in your userspace. It also includes areas to keep your to do lists, bookmarks, list of tools. You can customise your sandbox organiser to add new features and sections. Once created you can access it simply by clicking the sandbox link at the top of the page. You can create and then customise your own sandbox organiser just by clicking the button on the page. All ideas for improvements and other versions would be really appreciated.

Huge thanks to PrimeHunter and NavinoEvans for their work on the technical parts, without them it wouldn't have happened.

Hope its helpful

John Cummings (talk) 11:23, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Barnstar


Introducing the Horticulture and Gardening Barnstar. Jerm (talk) 04:06, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Category:Horticulture and Gardening articles needing expert attention has been nominated for discussion
Category:Horticulture and Gardening articles needing expert attention 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. Peaceray (talk) 20:36, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Project on Garden
Over the next week, there is going to be a work project on Garden by the Wikipedia Discord server as part of an attempt to get Garden to B-class and we would appreciate your help. They are trying to get all vital articles to B-class. (Oinkers42) (talk) 03:15, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Requested move of George Russell
There is a discussion at Talk:George Russell (racing driver) which may be of interest to members of the WikiProject. Please feel free to contribute to the discussion. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 06:12, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Deletion discussion for Jardin botanique alpin "Daniella"
The article Jardin botanique alpin "Daniella" has been nominated for deletion. Your feedback would be appreciated at WP:Articles for deletion/Jardin botanique alpin "Daniella". Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:06, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like and turns it into something like
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from cite web, cite journal and doi.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

WikiProject Women in Green - July GA editathon event
Hello everyone -- I wanted to extend an invitation to all members of WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening. Throughout the month of July, WikiProject Women in Green (which focuses on bringing articles about women and women's works up to Good Article [GA] status and beyond) is hosting a GA editathon event on the theme of "Women and the Environment." Participants are invited to work on nominating and/or reviewing GA submissions related to women and the environment (e.g., gardeners, biologists, horticulturalists, or environmental-related books and films by women), with editors of all experience levels welcome. GA editing resources and one-on-one support will be made available by Women in Green, and participants will have the opportunity to receive a barnstar for their efforts. We hope to see you there! All the best, Alanna the Brave (talk) 20:30, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a class parameter to WikiProject banner shell, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to WikiProject banner shell, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass WPBannerMeta a new custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:41, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Villa Borghese gardens
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Villa Borghese gardens that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 01:12, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

Horticulturist or horticulturalist?
Are the terms 'horticulturist' and 'horticulturalist' both considered acceptable for the occupation? Both terms seem to be represented in dictionaries, but I've seen discussions suggesting that horticulturalist is incorrect. Our category tree at Category:Horticulturists uniformly uses horticulturist, but we have many articles that use horticulturalist in the body and title of the articles (John S. Harris (horticulturalist), John Cripps (horticulturalist), Graham Ross (horticulturalist)). gobonobo + c 21:29, 27 September 2023 (UTC)
 * That's an interesting question. Per this:, they are both correct, but horticulturist is the more common usage. --Tryptofish (talk) 22:15, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Ikebana
Lead section too short. If anyone could summaries points. Also requires additional sources. Exclusive Editor  Notify Me! 16:28, 19 February 2024 (UTC)