Talk:Stylidium

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Stylidium has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
August 6, 2006 Good article nominee Listed

	Stylidium is within the scope of WikiProject Carnivorous plants, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to carnivorous plants. For more information, visit the project page.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance for WikiProject Plants assessment.

[edit] Species list

I've included as complete a list that I could find from the literature. This website (in German) lists every name known include vars., but many of the species names are synonyms of other established species, so the list in the article contains most of those. That's why the total is 316, but from most reports I read there are only approximately 230 species. I've also included some species that were reported in early literature (1920s) that may have been renamed or moved to a different genus after further phylogenetic study. I've also been adding common names as I run across them. I plan to go back, species by species, and remove the synonyms from the list and place them in parenthesis next to the most common name. This can be difficult, though, as google isn't very forthcoming with hits for these species names. And the difference between Stylidium leptorhizum and Stylidium leptorrhizum, for example, appears to only be preferential spelling, though one is reported to have a var. pilosum while the other doesn't. I'll continue on. Feel free to help. Rkitko 10:50, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rkitko. I took a look around, and you are right: There don't seem to be any good sources of species lists on the web! I guess you are going to be building the definitive list. :) I would suggest that at some point you make a seperate page for the list of species (as I have done with Pinguicula and Drosera) so that the main page doesn't get too long. Keep up the good work! --NoahElhardt 20:51, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Noah. Thanks for taking a look! I actually just got an e-mail back from one of the authors of the Darnowski references I cited. He said there actually are 300+ species now, so the list might be fairly accurate. He said a colleague of his is currently writing a comprehensive book that should cover as many species as possible, so I will be looking forward to that in the coming months. I meant to ask you about moving the species list over to a new article--you read my mind and answer the question I had not asked yet! Thanks! -Rkitko 01:46, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Separate list completed. My CTRL-V (paste) keys are practically worn out from changing that list into a wikilinked. Let me know what else you think I can do to improve this article. I'm working on obtaining photos (growing my own triggerplants! Specifically S. affine, S. fimbriatum, and S. laricifolium), since there aren't any fair use images on the web that I've found. Thanks! Rkitko 21:25, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Good Work! This article is looking really nice. Why don't you add an External Links section and then apply for good article status? :) --NoahElhardt 21:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA pass

An excellent, well-written and well-referenced article. My only suggestion would be to try to find a photo that gives a better idea of the appearance of the plants. TimVickers 02:24, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Great, thanks! I'm working on the photos--fair use or PD ones are hard to come by! There are some on a few Australian government websites, but I wasn't sure if photos produced by the Australian government were public domain. Thanks again; I'll continue to work on this article and try to bring it to even higher standards. --Rkitko 02:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)