![]() | Narcissus (plant) has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 3, 2015. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Narcissus (plant) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
From the above section, "The name jonquil is sometimes used in North America, particularly in the South,...". This is ambiguous as south with a capital S makes me think of the Southern United States. On the other hand saying North America would indicate that the word is used in Mexico and north to some undefined part of the US. CambridgeBayWeather ( talk) 15:11, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm not really sure how nobody noticed this over the last five years, but the entire Horticultural divisions section appears to be original research by User:GardenOpus. He even cites himself in the text of the article! In addition, it doesn't appear that the American Daffodil Society was ever mentioned in the article before he edited it, so I would recommend looking into how much significance/authority that organization actually has. — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 18:27, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Well now an interesting situation has arisen - that section was moved to List of Narcissus horticultural divisions, and it is being alleged that it is copywrite violation on its talk page because it is written "written just as RHS does", as above. Is it fair use as stated here? Any thoughts? -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 05:10, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Really excellent edits to the article today. I undid just one added sentence because it was misleading:
There is no need to capitalise or italicise the word "narcissus", as it is a common word in the English language. <ref name = "SOED">{{cite book|title=Shorter Oxford English dictionary, 6th ed.|year=2007|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=United Kingdom|isbn=0199206872|pages=3804}}</ref>
Although "narcissus" is indeed one of the popular names of the plant and a common noun, it is also the genus, and in the latter usage it is generally (and properly) capitalized and italicized (e.g., Narcissus poeticus var. recurvus, N. obvallaris). Rivertorch ( talk) 09:50, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I really think this is high rather than mid importance, it is already level 4. Given that I really think we should aim for GA status. The Germans have already reached that, indeed did so many years ago! There is a long way to go but I have added quite a bit and am raising quality to C. -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 16:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
In any case there is now enough material covering most aspects of the genus, to raise this to B quality. -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 01:43, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I changed the rating to A, being essentially complete, but it will require a huge clean up to meet GA, although now within reach. -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 14:22, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Assessment;
Admittedly, the use of Lentern lily is uncommon, but it does occur, and is sourced. First it appears in ecclesistical writing, eg Oxford, Hereford, and secondly in Masefield's novel 'Brimstone'. Some versions of Houseman spell Lenten as Lentern, although it is possibly a corruption of the text. Obviously not a major issue, but at least the curious will find sources cited here -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 06:42, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
A note was left on an edit that the fact that daffodils were yellow was never mentioned. Since there is a range of colours, stating the range of the spectrum should suffice, rather than listing every single colour separately. -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 22:36, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
Just a few small points. I can't access the cites that go to Google Books, so I can't check the paraphrasing.
Lead
Description
General
Specific
TBC
Hekerui ( talk) 16:02, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Fredlyfish4 ( talk · contribs) 18:34, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Infobox
Done IUCN lists 5 species. OK I will remove and apply to all species pages listed--
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
19:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Lead
Done changed and linked to ancient civilisation since I cannot see a way to link to a list of names, and adding names to text would lengthen the lead further--
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
19:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done linked to Asphodelus as in text --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
19:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done
Done shortened and reduced from 5 paragraphs to 4 --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
19:57, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Description
Done let's stick with hermaphroditic which is in the source cited --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
20:03, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Taxonomy
Done could have been worded better - the International Register is the RHS list - reworded and updated --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
20:33, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done The terms are used as defined by Zonneveld, hence the quotes, to refer to stages in the evolution of speciation. So recent with respect to ancient, ie not yet established as an independent species. Reworded.--
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
20:47, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Ecology
Done In plant pathology, the term is generally used with reference to economic impact. Reworded - replaced important with serious --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
21:07, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done I had that same thought when writing this section, but stuck with the naming convention, since the genus name is being used as an adjective, not a proper noun. --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
21:10, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done reworded --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
21:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Cultivation
Done Well not entirely, where sources are using 'daffodil' I stuck with it. i changed one group - the early illustrations, but kept the other because that's what the text refers to. --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
21:39, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done It followed the citation - nevertheless I changed it to a {{quote}}--
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
21:43, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done In this context, 'popular' implies sales data - reworded --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
03:24, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Done references added --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
05:40, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Images
Done Dates added to files
Other comments for potential FA review, but not needed for passing GA:
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
reviwed 22 Novemebr 2016 -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 21:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
The toxic effects of ingesting Narcissus products for both man and animals (such as cattle, goats, pigs and cats) have long been recognised and they have been used in suicide attempts. Ingestion of N. pseudonarcissus or N. jonquilla is followed by salivation, acute abdominal pains, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, then neurological and cardiac events, including trembling, convulsions, and paralysis. Death may result if large quantities are consumed. The toxicity of Narcissus varies with species, N. poeticus being more toxic than N. pseudonarcissus, for instance. Nor is the distribution of toxins even within the plant, for instance there is a five times higher concentration of alkaloid in the stem of N. papyraceus than in the bulb, making it dangerous to herbivores more likely to consume the stem than the bulb, and is part of the plant's defence mechanisms.[18]
Not all Narcissus species are equally dangerous. The bulbs of N. poeticus, for example, are more dangerous than those of N. pseudonarcissus. Neither do all plant tissues have the same concentration or profile of alkaloids. Thus, the alkaloid content of N. papyraceus is five times higher in the aerial part than in the bulbs, being toxic for herbivorous mammals. The distribution of the alkaloids in the plant tissues can be related with the plant's defense mechanism such as protection from parasites. The bulbs can also be toxic to other nearby plants, including roses, rice, and cabbages, inhibiting growth.[18] For instance placing cut flowers in a vase alongside other flowers shortens the life of the latter.[174] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.185.47.87 ( talk) 05:18, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
I know that this is a good article, but I would like to split Daffodils in culture off from the rest of this article per WP:SPLIT. This article appears to talk about daffodils from a physical perspective before sliding into a historical and cultural one; i.e, Section 9 and its bibliography, as well as its summary in the lead of the article. However, the initial reason why I wanted to split this article: size. This article is 260,468 bytes as of this writing, which is WAY over even the 100,000 byte limit listed in the splitting criteria as "almost certainly should be divided". Do I have permission to split? Thanks. RuneMan3 ( talk) 03:55, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
There is a common problem with growing paperwhite (& related?) bulbs indoors: they grow too tall and fall over. In recent years there is a common recommendation to stunt the growth by watering with a solution of up to 10% alcohol. Perhaps this should be mentioned in the article.- 71.174.190.122 ( talk) 16:04, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Please include a list of the paperwhite species. The article Narcissus (plant) has good content about "'Paperwhite form", but is vague about specifics.- 71.174.190.122 ( talk) 16:12, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Narcissus (plant). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:53, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Narcissus (plant). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:50, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Narcissus (plant). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Both the Narcissus (plant) and Taxonomy of Narcissus articles have a "Names and etymology" section ( here and here respectively). Any chance these could be combined to avoid duplication? I would hazard putting it all at Narcissus (plant) with a link from Taxonomy of Narcissus would be better but what say ye? — AjaxSmack 15:27, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
![]() | Narcissus (plant) has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 3, 2015. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Narcissus (plant) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
From the above section, "The name jonquil is sometimes used in North America, particularly in the South,...". This is ambiguous as south with a capital S makes me think of the Southern United States. On the other hand saying North America would indicate that the word is used in Mexico and north to some undefined part of the US. CambridgeBayWeather ( talk) 15:11, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
I'm not really sure how nobody noticed this over the last five years, but the entire Horticultural divisions section appears to be original research by User:GardenOpus. He even cites himself in the text of the article! In addition, it doesn't appear that the American Daffodil Society was ever mentioned in the article before he edited it, so I would recommend looking into how much significance/authority that organization actually has. — Gordon P. Hemsley→ ✉ 18:27, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Well now an interesting situation has arisen - that section was moved to List of Narcissus horticultural divisions, and it is being alleged that it is copywrite violation on its talk page because it is written "written just as RHS does", as above. Is it fair use as stated here? Any thoughts? -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 05:10, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Really excellent edits to the article today. I undid just one added sentence because it was misleading:
There is no need to capitalise or italicise the word "narcissus", as it is a common word in the English language. <ref name = "SOED">{{cite book|title=Shorter Oxford English dictionary, 6th ed.|year=2007|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=United Kingdom|isbn=0199206872|pages=3804}}</ref>
Although "narcissus" is indeed one of the popular names of the plant and a common noun, it is also the genus, and in the latter usage it is generally (and properly) capitalized and italicized (e.g., Narcissus poeticus var. recurvus, N. obvallaris). Rivertorch ( talk) 09:50, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
I really think this is high rather than mid importance, it is already level 4. Given that I really think we should aim for GA status. The Germans have already reached that, indeed did so many years ago! There is a long way to go but I have added quite a bit and am raising quality to C. -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 16:41, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
In any case there is now enough material covering most aspects of the genus, to raise this to B quality. -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 01:43, 18 September 2014 (UTC)
I changed the rating to A, being essentially complete, but it will require a huge clean up to meet GA, although now within reach. -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 14:22, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Assessment;
Admittedly, the use of Lentern lily is uncommon, but it does occur, and is sourced. First it appears in ecclesistical writing, eg Oxford, Hereford, and secondly in Masefield's novel 'Brimstone'. Some versions of Houseman spell Lenten as Lentern, although it is possibly a corruption of the text. Obviously not a major issue, but at least the curious will find sources cited here -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 06:42, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
A note was left on an edit that the fact that daffodils were yellow was never mentioned. Since there is a range of colours, stating the range of the spectrum should suffice, rather than listing every single colour separately. -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 22:36, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
Just a few small points. I can't access the cites that go to Google Books, so I can't check the paraphrasing.
Lead
Description
General
Specific
TBC
Hekerui ( talk) 16:02, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Fredlyfish4 ( talk · contribs) 18:34, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Infobox
Done IUCN lists 5 species. OK I will remove and apply to all species pages listed--
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
19:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Lead
Done changed and linked to ancient civilisation since I cannot see a way to link to a list of names, and adding names to text would lengthen the lead further--
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
19:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done linked to Asphodelus as in text --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
19:34, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done
Done shortened and reduced from 5 paragraphs to 4 --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
19:57, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Description
Done let's stick with hermaphroditic which is in the source cited --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
20:03, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Taxonomy
Done could have been worded better - the International Register is the RHS list - reworded and updated --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
20:33, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done The terms are used as defined by Zonneveld, hence the quotes, to refer to stages in the evolution of speciation. So recent with respect to ancient, ie not yet established as an independent species. Reworded.--
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
20:47, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Ecology
Done In plant pathology, the term is generally used with reference to economic impact. Reworded - replaced important with serious --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
21:07, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done I had that same thought when writing this section, but stuck with the naming convention, since the genus name is being used as an adjective, not a proper noun. --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
21:10, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done reworded --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
21:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Cultivation
Done Well not entirely, where sources are using 'daffodil' I stuck with it. i changed one group - the early illustrations, but kept the other because that's what the text refers to. --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
21:39, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done It followed the citation - nevertheless I changed it to a {{quote}}--
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
21:43, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Done In this context, 'popular' implies sales data - reworded --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
03:24, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Done references added --
Michael Goodyear (
talk)
05:40, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Images
Done Dates added to files
Other comments for potential FA review, but not needed for passing GA:
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
reviwed 22 Novemebr 2016 -- Michael Goodyear ( talk) 21:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
The toxic effects of ingesting Narcissus products for both man and animals (such as cattle, goats, pigs and cats) have long been recognised and they have been used in suicide attempts. Ingestion of N. pseudonarcissus or N. jonquilla is followed by salivation, acute abdominal pains, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, then neurological and cardiac events, including trembling, convulsions, and paralysis. Death may result if large quantities are consumed. The toxicity of Narcissus varies with species, N. poeticus being more toxic than N. pseudonarcissus, for instance. Nor is the distribution of toxins even within the plant, for instance there is a five times higher concentration of alkaloid in the stem of N. papyraceus than in the bulb, making it dangerous to herbivores more likely to consume the stem than the bulb, and is part of the plant's defence mechanisms.[18]
Not all Narcissus species are equally dangerous. The bulbs of N. poeticus, for example, are more dangerous than those of N. pseudonarcissus. Neither do all plant tissues have the same concentration or profile of alkaloids. Thus, the alkaloid content of N. papyraceus is five times higher in the aerial part than in the bulbs, being toxic for herbivorous mammals. The distribution of the alkaloids in the plant tissues can be related with the plant's defense mechanism such as protection from parasites. The bulbs can also be toxic to other nearby plants, including roses, rice, and cabbages, inhibiting growth.[18] For instance placing cut flowers in a vase alongside other flowers shortens the life of the latter.[174] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.185.47.87 ( talk) 05:18, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
I know that this is a good article, but I would like to split Daffodils in culture off from the rest of this article per WP:SPLIT. This article appears to talk about daffodils from a physical perspective before sliding into a historical and cultural one; i.e, Section 9 and its bibliography, as well as its summary in the lead of the article. However, the initial reason why I wanted to split this article: size. This article is 260,468 bytes as of this writing, which is WAY over even the 100,000 byte limit listed in the splitting criteria as "almost certainly should be divided". Do I have permission to split? Thanks. RuneMan3 ( talk) 03:55, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
There is a common problem with growing paperwhite (& related?) bulbs indoors: they grow too tall and fall over. In recent years there is a common recommendation to stunt the growth by watering with a solution of up to 10% alcohol. Perhaps this should be mentioned in the article.- 71.174.190.122 ( talk) 16:04, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Please include a list of the paperwhite species. The article Narcissus (plant) has good content about "'Paperwhite form", but is vague about specifics.- 71.174.190.122 ( talk) 16:12, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Narcissus (plant). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:53, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Narcissus (plant). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:50, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Narcissus (plant). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 21:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Both the Narcissus (plant) and Taxonomy of Narcissus articles have a "Names and etymology" section ( here and here respectively). Any chance these could be combined to avoid duplication? I would hazard putting it all at Narcissus (plant) with a link from Taxonomy of Narcissus would be better but what say ye? — AjaxSmack 15:27, 31 March 2019 (UTC)