This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a map or maps be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Wikipedians in British Columbia may be able to help! |
I believe the taxobox image should show as much of the organism represented as possible. In addition, documentation of identification is important as well. Replacing an image of Morton Arboretum accessions with an undocumented closeup of a cone is replacing complete information with narrowly-focused uncertainty. Nickrz ( talk) 19:15, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
The current view is that Nootka cypress is at the best included in Cupressus. See the references I just added. Thus the article should be moved to Cupressus nootkatensis. Krasanen ( talk) 13:51, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Are you referring to citations 6 and 7? 6 is Mao et al. 2010, which as far as I can tell is fairly agnostic on the topic of what should be in Cupressus, simply choosing to refer to "Cupressus sensu strico" (i.e., the clearly defined Old World cypress clade) and "Cupressus HCX" meaning the Hesperocyparis/Callitropsis+Xanthocyparis clade. Reference 7 is just some guy running a website, who opines that there is no way to morphologically distinguish Old World from New World "Cupressus" (but there is, see e.g. Terry et al. 2016), and that using molecular data to define a genus is an "an abstract, artificial process" that he hasn't "heard of" being used to justify genera separation (which it obviously is so used, see cryptic species). It seems this topic isn't as settled as some "Cupressus" pages portray it. Amdurbin ( talk)
The result of the move request was: ( non-admin closure) MOVED without objection. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 01:12, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Cupressus nootkatensis → Callitropsis nootkatensis – The majority of authors now use Callitropsis nootkatensis as the binomial, accepting it as a separate genus from the old world and Asian clades Kev min § 14:04, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a map or maps be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Wikipedians in British Columbia may be able to help! |
I believe the taxobox image should show as much of the organism represented as possible. In addition, documentation of identification is important as well. Replacing an image of Morton Arboretum accessions with an undocumented closeup of a cone is replacing complete information with narrowly-focused uncertainty. Nickrz ( talk) 19:15, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
The current view is that Nootka cypress is at the best included in Cupressus. See the references I just added. Thus the article should be moved to Cupressus nootkatensis. Krasanen ( talk) 13:51, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Are you referring to citations 6 and 7? 6 is Mao et al. 2010, which as far as I can tell is fairly agnostic on the topic of what should be in Cupressus, simply choosing to refer to "Cupressus sensu strico" (i.e., the clearly defined Old World cypress clade) and "Cupressus HCX" meaning the Hesperocyparis/Callitropsis+Xanthocyparis clade. Reference 7 is just some guy running a website, who opines that there is no way to morphologically distinguish Old World from New World "Cupressus" (but there is, see e.g. Terry et al. 2016), and that using molecular data to define a genus is an "an abstract, artificial process" that he hasn't "heard of" being used to justify genera separation (which it obviously is so used, see cryptic species). It seems this topic isn't as settled as some "Cupressus" pages portray it. Amdurbin ( talk)
The result of the move request was: ( non-admin closure) MOVED without objection. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 01:12, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Cupressus nootkatensis → Callitropsis nootkatensis – The majority of authors now use Callitropsis nootkatensis as the binomial, accepting it as a separate genus from the old world and Asian clades Kev min § 14:04, 9 October 2021 (UTC)