Talk:Cylindropuntia fulgida: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:08, 29 December 2012

Plants Unassessed

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Merger?

There is a very large amount of overlap between this article and the article on the Opuntia ficus-indica, the primary edible species. One resolution would be to merge them, but it might be preferable to move the content concerning the edible plant and its fruit into the other article. Liam Proven (talk) 22:37, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? What overlap? They are completely different plants. Stan (talk) 19:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What are you talking about? Cylindropuntia is a distant relative of Opuntia. Opuntia ficus-indica is a totally different type of cactus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.19.167.108 (talk) 07:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Picture

I am fairly certain that the picture on this page is of a Teddy-bear Cholla. It has much finer spines than the Jumping Cholla. Please compare the pictures on this page, the wikipedia article on Teddy-bear Cholla, and the pictures on this external link [1] 68.84.206.80 23:12, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right. I removed the pic, along with the accuracy tag. If there was something else in the article you thought was inaccurate, feel free to replace it. But that was definitely a TB Cholla. Jumping Chollas have thinner and longer branches. --DanielCD 23:27, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Values are Inconsistent

I don't know the original values but the conversions between metres and feet are incorrect. For example 300-1000m is ~980-3300ft, 4m is ~13ft, 2-3cm is ~0.8-1.2inches. However as I said I don't know which are the original values. The conversions are definitely off though. 124.148.206.193 (talk) 12:46, 24 April 2012 (UTC)LogiC[reply]

inconsistent measurement units

The Description section needs to have the SI units and imperical units swapped around (SI put in the parentheses and imperical in the sentence proper).

Reasoning: this article is about a plant that is primarily a plant in the USA, and in the lede units are given in square miles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.82.68.160 (talk) 12:28, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 There is a very large amount of overlap between this article and the article on the [[Opuntia ficus-indica]], the primary edible species. One resolution would be to merge them, but it might be preferable to move the content concerning the edible plant and its fruit into the other article. [[User:Lproven|Liam Proven]] ([[User talk:Lproven|talk]]) 22:37, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 :Huh? What overlap?  They are completely different plants. [[User:Stan Shebs|Stan]] ([[User talk:Stan Shebs|talk]]) 19:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
-What are you talking about? Cylindropuntia is a distant relative of Opuntia. Opuntia ficus-indica is a totally different type of cactus.
+What are you talking about? Cylindropuntia is a distant relative of Opuntia. Opuntia ficus-indica is a totally different type of cactus.  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/174.19.167.108|174.19.167.108]] ([[User talk:174.19.167.108|talk]]) 07:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 ==Incorrect Picture==