![]() | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
The text is inaccurate - 'Ti tree' applies only to Melaleuca. 218.14.48.191 ( talk) 03:14, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Is this page a candidate for a Set index article, as described in Wikipedia:Disambiguation? The DPL bot complains about links to this page, but it is a fact that the name "tea tree" or "tea plant" has historically been used rather ambiguosly.
In this case the article could be "Tea tree (plant)" and the disambuigation page would be reduced to pointing to the new article + the place names. Ziounclesi ( talk) 16:26, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
I noticed Camellia isn't linked to, while it is a category of plant that encompasses different "tea trees". I don't have any knowledge of the topic though, so I won't link it.
Having noticed the edit war happening here, thought I'd chip in the following from Wikipedia's Manual of Style for disambiguation pages: "References should not appear on disambiguation pages. Dab pages are not articles; instead, incorporate the references into the target articles." So, no citations need appear on this disambiguation page. What matters is whether it can be verified that the contested entries – which seem to be Melaleuca alternifolia, Leptospermum scoparium and Leptospermum laevigatum – are each known as "tea tree" or a sufficiently similar term such that it's reasonable to assume that someone would type "tea tree" in order to find one of these species.
Hopefully, both sides of this dispute will come here to offer further commentary, instead of automatically reverting each other.
(As a side note, I would point out that entries on disambiguation pages ought only to have one blue link per entry, which is currently not the case.) -- VeryCrocker ( talk) 07:46, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This disambiguation page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
The text is inaccurate - 'Ti tree' applies only to Melaleuca. 218.14.48.191 ( talk) 03:14, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Is this page a candidate for a Set index article, as described in Wikipedia:Disambiguation? The DPL bot complains about links to this page, but it is a fact that the name "tea tree" or "tea plant" has historically been used rather ambiguosly.
In this case the article could be "Tea tree (plant)" and the disambuigation page would be reduced to pointing to the new article + the place names. Ziounclesi ( talk) 16:26, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
I noticed Camellia isn't linked to, while it is a category of plant that encompasses different "tea trees". I don't have any knowledge of the topic though, so I won't link it.
Having noticed the edit war happening here, thought I'd chip in the following from Wikipedia's Manual of Style for disambiguation pages: "References should not appear on disambiguation pages. Dab pages are not articles; instead, incorporate the references into the target articles." So, no citations need appear on this disambiguation page. What matters is whether it can be verified that the contested entries – which seem to be Melaleuca alternifolia, Leptospermum scoparium and Leptospermum laevigatum – are each known as "tea tree" or a sufficiently similar term such that it's reasonable to assume that someone would type "tea tree" in order to find one of these species.
Hopefully, both sides of this dispute will come here to offer further commentary, instead of automatically reverting each other.
(As a side note, I would point out that entries on disambiguation pages ought only to have one blue link per entry, which is currently not the case.) -- VeryCrocker ( talk) 07:46, 8 June 2014 (UTC)