Talk:List of invasive species

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	List of invasive species is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to plants and botany. For more information, visit the project page.
List	This article has been rated as List-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

isn't the Starling an invasive bird of North America? from what i understand, the bird was introduced in the 19th century in central park, ny, by a group who wanted to introduce into the new world every old world species mentioned by shakespeare.. Kingturtle 23:32, 18 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I don't know about the other lists, but the list of North American invasives is far from complete. Also maybe a bit misleading? Some plants from one region of North America have become invasives in other regions (particularly regions separated by mountain ranges). Wouldn't listing by biome, rather than continent, be more useful? SB Johnny 14:56, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 Reformat this list? 2 Category deletion discussion 3 Expansion from source 4 Proposed addition 5 suggestion for informal policy

[edit] Reformat this list?

I was thinking that a good format for this list would be to list species by Region of Origin. This could be easily done by checking the individual pages and then making the correct adjustments. The region affected can still be listed but that should be on the side, in parenthesis. For example the Mexican Poppy is listed under Africa which I believe causes confusion. My format would be

North America

Plants

• Prickly pears (Opuntia)

Invasive in: Africa, Australia

or something along those lines. I believe that the region of origin is the most important part of this list.--Jonthecheet 04:37, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

• Thats a really neat idea, it would make the page far more user friendly.--nixie 04:38, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I clarified the headings... it would be nice to annotate the list with region of origins, but I think the user will be more interested in the plants invasive in a particular region, rather than plants from a particular region that are invasive in other regions. SB Johnny 15:37, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category deletion discussion

Removed cfdnotice, cfd has completed. --Kbdank71 16:21, 9 May 2008 (UTC) Proposal withdrawn. MikeHobday 19:51, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Expansion from source

Please help improve this article or section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (January 2008)

Someone might want to compare this article against [1] and add any species which are missing. -- Beland (talk) 17:03, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed addition

Hmm. Introduced by human action...to a region where it did not previously occur naturally...capable of establishing a breeding population in the new location...and becomes a pest in the new location, threatening the local biodiversity.

There is a species of African ape that matches all the above criteria and which has spread to every region of the world. Why isn't it on the list?

Tualha (Talk) 14:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] suggestion for informal policy

i've recommended this policy for other lists, with success. it helps to avoid vandalism, which is particularly easily hidden in articles that are lists. the recommendation is this: for any list of notable X, if X doesn't have an article of its own on wikipedia, it should not be included in list of X. since lists themselves do not establish notability, and since most entries within articles that are lists tend not to include WP:RS citations, it's not a breach of policy to put in place this informal policy. it's simply too easy to create some reasonable yet obscure sounding entry that winds up sitting on the list as permanent vandalism. it's most pernicious in lists of notable people, but this list may already have bogus entries. thoughts? if there are no stringent objections, i'll start culling entries that have no associated article in a few days. note that many entries appear to be poorly created - for example, listing the latin name which links to a real article, but listing the common name as a redlink - one or the other should probably be a link, not both, unless there's a DAB page involved. Anastrophe (talk) 01:04, 19 April 2008 (UTC)