This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
The contents of the Macrophylla page were merged into Microphylls and megaphylls on 17 January 2016. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Microphyll was copied or moved into Leaf size with this edit on 21:42, 18 January 2016. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This whole article is terribly confusing. Somebody obviously used the thesaurus on this thing to try and make it sound high class. Oddly organized too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.70.85.125 ( talk) 15:28, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
I would agree with this. I wonder if this page should be included in a page on Leaves as a subsection? I think that might be preferable. 207.233.7.111 ( talk) 22:36, 30 September 2009 (UTC) Michaplot ( talk) 22:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes. Could we rename it to Microphylls and megaphylls, so as to better describe the content? The leaf page is already very long, so moving this material there doesn't seem desirable. Nadiatalent ( talk) 18:26, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
We need to get some sort of consensus here. This article is worthless. A) I don't think this article needs to be mostly about plant evolution (all of that should be on the plant evolution pages) B) The language needs to be cleaned up, because in many cases the authors' thesauri failed them. C) Micro- and Macrophylls should be subsections on leaf morphology pages. I'm going to make some small changes (like the fact the author thought the prefix micro- means microscopic...) to make this less embarrassing for now. PSseudoscienceFTL 23:08, 25 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PseudoscienceFTL ( talk • contribs)
This was originally posted at User talk:Sminthopsis84
Sminth, is there an article giving about the ecology definition of Microphyll, and related terms? If not, there shouldn't be a disambiguation page until there is. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 05:45, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
( edit conflict)It might work to create Microphyll (ecology). I had expected that it could be attacked as not sufficiently notable, but strangely enough, we do have an article on Raunkiær plant life-form, so that's a kind of foundation. Leonard James (Len; often L. J.) Webb (1920-2008, non Leonard James Webb) developed an important classification, starting with his 1959 article "A Physiognomic Classification Of Australian Rain Forests". Sadly, Rainforest doesn't even discuss such definitions, taking a "there's rain and it's a forest" view. Webb, on the other hand wants to separate groups of differently adapted plants that intermix and states: "There is, indeed, increasing evidence that mixtures of Australian Sclerophyll forests with Rain forests, whether of tropical or temperate character, represent stages of succession, stabilized under limited soil nutrient levels by regular catastrophic factors such as fire." article here. Forest has some small mention of other classification systems. It looks as if this quite complex subject is just missing, and to develop the necessary pages would be a major project. I don't know what would go into a page called Microphyll (ecology), until such time as forest ecology develops beyond a tiny overview. P.S.: Yeah, horsetails and Psilotum as ferns is weird on so many morphological grounds (the leaves, the stems, the gametophyte, the reproductive structures) and one that seems open to challenge as DNA sequencing takes a more whole-genome approach. Perhaps having reduced megaphylls as not inconsistent with not being ferns ... Sminthopsis84 ( talk) 21:42, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
@ Sminthopsis84:Do you mind if I move this entire section to the article talk page? I'll leave a note here that it was moved. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 01:12, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
The contents of the Macrophylla page were merged into Microphylls and megaphylls on 17 January 2016. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Microphyll was copied or moved into Leaf size with this edit on 21:42, 18 January 2016. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This whole article is terribly confusing. Somebody obviously used the thesaurus on this thing to try and make it sound high class. Oddly organized too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.70.85.125 ( talk) 15:28, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
I would agree with this. I wonder if this page should be included in a page on Leaves as a subsection? I think that might be preferable. 207.233.7.111 ( talk) 22:36, 30 September 2009 (UTC) Michaplot ( talk) 22:37, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Yes. Could we rename it to Microphylls and megaphylls, so as to better describe the content? The leaf page is already very long, so moving this material there doesn't seem desirable. Nadiatalent ( talk) 18:26, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
We need to get some sort of consensus here. This article is worthless. A) I don't think this article needs to be mostly about plant evolution (all of that should be on the plant evolution pages) B) The language needs to be cleaned up, because in many cases the authors' thesauri failed them. C) Micro- and Macrophylls should be subsections on leaf morphology pages. I'm going to make some small changes (like the fact the author thought the prefix micro- means microscopic...) to make this less embarrassing for now. PSseudoscienceFTL 23:08, 25 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by PseudoscienceFTL ( talk • contribs)
This was originally posted at User talk:Sminthopsis84
Sminth, is there an article giving about the ecology definition of Microphyll, and related terms? If not, there shouldn't be a disambiguation page until there is. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 05:45, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
( edit conflict)It might work to create Microphyll (ecology). I had expected that it could be attacked as not sufficiently notable, but strangely enough, we do have an article on Raunkiær plant life-form, so that's a kind of foundation. Leonard James (Len; often L. J.) Webb (1920-2008, non Leonard James Webb) developed an important classification, starting with his 1959 article "A Physiognomic Classification Of Australian Rain Forests". Sadly, Rainforest doesn't even discuss such definitions, taking a "there's rain and it's a forest" view. Webb, on the other hand wants to separate groups of differently adapted plants that intermix and states: "There is, indeed, increasing evidence that mixtures of Australian Sclerophyll forests with Rain forests, whether of tropical or temperate character, represent stages of succession, stabilized under limited soil nutrient levels by regular catastrophic factors such as fire." article here. Forest has some small mention of other classification systems. It looks as if this quite complex subject is just missing, and to develop the necessary pages would be a major project. I don't know what would go into a page called Microphyll (ecology), until such time as forest ecology develops beyond a tiny overview. P.S.: Yeah, horsetails and Psilotum as ferns is weird on so many morphological grounds (the leaves, the stems, the gametophyte, the reproductive structures) and one that seems open to challenge as DNA sequencing takes a more whole-genome approach. Perhaps having reduced megaphylls as not inconsistent with not being ferns ... Sminthopsis84 ( talk) 21:42, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
@ Sminthopsis84:Do you mind if I move this entire section to the article talk page? I'll leave a note here that it was moved. Oiyarbepsy ( talk) 01:12, 28 December 2015 (UTC)