Aquilegia sibirica is currently a Biology and medicine good article nominee. Nominated by Pbritti ( talk) at 18:00, 4 April 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: North-central Asian species of columbine |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Aquilegia sibirica 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 |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
A fact from Aquilegia sibirica appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 1 October 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
The result was: promoted by
AirshipJungleman29
talk 15:21, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Created by Pbritti ( talk). Self-nominated at 23:49, 14 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Aquilegia sibirica; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
Hey Pbritti, just wanted to make you aware of the Biodiversity Heritage Library entry for this species. There is a wealth of taxonomic and ecological information in the documents there that should probably be included in the article for it to meet the "broad" requirement of GA. If you'd like to work together to trawl through the sources and expand it, I'd be happy to work collaboratively on this article. Just let me know! Fritzmann ( message me) 01:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: Pbritti ( talk · contribs) 18:00, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Yakikaki ( talk · contribs) 21:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
I did the DYK review of this article, but I'm happy to take on this review as well. I'll get back in the coming days with my first comments. Regards, Yakikaki ( talk) 21:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
First of all, thanks for taking the effort to write this article. It is already an enjoyable read about a very beautiful and interesting plant! Here are my more formal remarks for the review:
The plant has been considered a medicinal herb in Mongolia.In "Antifungal activity of Mongolian medicinal plant extracts" we learn that "Aquilegia sibirica L. [sic] is considered a major therapeutic drug of Oriental Medicine, where the plant is usedin female diseases, bronchial asthma, rheumatism and cardiovascular diseases andmoreover it inhibitedS. aureus (Gonchig et al.2008)" So it seems you could elaborate on how and against what it has been used as a traditional medicine? Similarly, at least I find it picturesque that the specimen introduced to the US in 1933 were gifts from the Botanical Garden in Leningrad. (I at least would not have expected that botanists in the USSR remained in cordial contact with their US counterparts even during the height of Stalin terror.) A simple line about this could expand the article a bit and add to its interest for the general reader. Lastly:
In common with other Aquilegia species, the Siberian columbine possesses nectar spurs. Crosses between Aquilegia sibirica and Aquilegia ecalcarata–the only Aquilegia species that lacks spurred pedals–have been studied to identify the gene responsible for spurred pedalsAs a reader I want to know more about this research, what was the result? So I would encourage a general closer scourging of sources and try to build the article even further. I think it is possible. You have a fair number of reliable sources quoted, but there may be more useful stuff out there. While there is no strict criterion for the article to be of a certain length it is true that it is short, compared to other GA articles on plants. Consider if you can expand the three sections which right now make up the article. The physical description of the plants is for example quite brief. Perhaps there is nothing much more to add, but take another look and see if you can't elaborate a bit more on it. Other sections (or info), like on conservation status, cultivation (is it cultivated? The Finns seem to suggest it could be cultivated, but plantlust dot com (what a name!) seem to have put theory into practice, already.) or etymology is lacking altogether. So to sum up, I would encourage you to try to grow (pun intended) the article a bit more; a bit more flowery (pun intended) language could help you a bit on the way there, as well.
Aquilegia sibirica is native to the north-central Asian regions of Siberia, northern Mongolia, Kazakhstan, and Xinjiang. Evidence for a continuous Euro-Siberian vegetation is found in the distribution of the Siberian columbine considered alongside that of the Aquilegia vulgaris. The population in Middle Siberia is considered a quaternary relict (a population that once possessed a broader range in an earlier geologic epoch).What does "Evidence for a continuous Euro-Siberian vegetation" mean? Is it another way of describing its range? Because if so, it contradicts the first and last sentence. And is the population in Middle Siberia a separate population from the populations found elsewhere in Siberia, northern Mongolia, Kazakhstan, and Xinjiang? I think this sentence could benefit from more clarity and some elaboration.
OK, those are my comments for now. A bit of a mixed bag, obviously, with some low hanging fruit (by the way, there is no description of the Siberica's fruit!) and some that may take more effort. Let me know if you have any comments/questions/concerns about this and we can see how we can solve it. Best regards, Yakikaki ( talk) 18:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Aquilegia sibirica is currently a Biology and medicine good article nominee. Nominated by Pbritti ( talk) at 18:00, 4 April 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: North-central Asian species of columbine |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Aquilegia sibirica 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 |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
A fact from Aquilegia sibirica appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 1 October 2023 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
The result was: promoted by
AirshipJungleman29
talk 15:21, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Created by Pbritti ( talk). Self-nominated at 23:49, 14 August 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Aquilegia sibirica; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.
Hey Pbritti, just wanted to make you aware of the Biodiversity Heritage Library entry for this species. There is a wealth of taxonomic and ecological information in the documents there that should probably be included in the article for it to meet the "broad" requirement of GA. If you'd like to work together to trawl through the sources and expand it, I'd be happy to work collaboratively on this article. Just let me know! Fritzmann ( message me) 01:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: Pbritti ( talk · contribs) 18:00, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Yakikaki ( talk · contribs) 21:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
I did the DYK review of this article, but I'm happy to take on this review as well. I'll get back in the coming days with my first comments. Regards, Yakikaki ( talk) 21:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
First of all, thanks for taking the effort to write this article. It is already an enjoyable read about a very beautiful and interesting plant! Here are my more formal remarks for the review:
The plant has been considered a medicinal herb in Mongolia.In "Antifungal activity of Mongolian medicinal plant extracts" we learn that "Aquilegia sibirica L. [sic] is considered a major therapeutic drug of Oriental Medicine, where the plant is usedin female diseases, bronchial asthma, rheumatism and cardiovascular diseases andmoreover it inhibitedS. aureus (Gonchig et al.2008)" So it seems you could elaborate on how and against what it has been used as a traditional medicine? Similarly, at least I find it picturesque that the specimen introduced to the US in 1933 were gifts from the Botanical Garden in Leningrad. (I at least would not have expected that botanists in the USSR remained in cordial contact with their US counterparts even during the height of Stalin terror.) A simple line about this could expand the article a bit and add to its interest for the general reader. Lastly:
In common with other Aquilegia species, the Siberian columbine possesses nectar spurs. Crosses between Aquilegia sibirica and Aquilegia ecalcarata–the only Aquilegia species that lacks spurred pedals–have been studied to identify the gene responsible for spurred pedalsAs a reader I want to know more about this research, what was the result? So I would encourage a general closer scourging of sources and try to build the article even further. I think it is possible. You have a fair number of reliable sources quoted, but there may be more useful stuff out there. While there is no strict criterion for the article to be of a certain length it is true that it is short, compared to other GA articles on plants. Consider if you can expand the three sections which right now make up the article. The physical description of the plants is for example quite brief. Perhaps there is nothing much more to add, but take another look and see if you can't elaborate a bit more on it. Other sections (or info), like on conservation status, cultivation (is it cultivated? The Finns seem to suggest it could be cultivated, but plantlust dot com (what a name!) seem to have put theory into practice, already.) or etymology is lacking altogether. So to sum up, I would encourage you to try to grow (pun intended) the article a bit more; a bit more flowery (pun intended) language could help you a bit on the way there, as well.
Aquilegia sibirica is native to the north-central Asian regions of Siberia, northern Mongolia, Kazakhstan, and Xinjiang. Evidence for a continuous Euro-Siberian vegetation is found in the distribution of the Siberian columbine considered alongside that of the Aquilegia vulgaris. The population in Middle Siberia is considered a quaternary relict (a population that once possessed a broader range in an earlier geologic epoch).What does "Evidence for a continuous Euro-Siberian vegetation" mean? Is it another way of describing its range? Because if so, it contradicts the first and last sentence. And is the population in Middle Siberia a separate population from the populations found elsewhere in Siberia, northern Mongolia, Kazakhstan, and Xinjiang? I think this sentence could benefit from more clarity and some elaboration.
OK, those are my comments for now. A bit of a mixed bag, obviously, with some low hanging fruit (by the way, there is no description of the Siberica's fruit!) and some that may take more effort. Let me know if you have any comments/questions/concerns about this and we can see how we can solve it. Best regards, Yakikaki ( talk) 18:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)