Talk:Monarda didyma: Difference between revisions
m Signing comment by 68.115.33.4 - "" |
No edit summary |
||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
The "Winnebago" don't call themselves that any more. They took back their own name: Ho Chunk. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.115.33.4|68.115.33.4]] ([[User talk:68.115.33.4|talk]]) 18:23, 12 May 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
The "Winnebago" don't call themselves that any more. They took back their own name: Ho Chunk. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/68.115.33.4|68.115.33.4]] ([[User talk:68.115.33.4|talk]]) 18:23, 12 May 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
This article mentions that the plants were used by the Blackfoot native americans, but the range of the plant does not show that it was present where the Blackfoot were. The section about it might properly be moved to the page on the Monarda genus? |
Revision as of 13:51, 26 July 2015
Plants Start‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||
|
incorrect image
I don't think that the attached image is of Monarda didyma. A clue is that the pictured flower is not scarlet in color, but the shape is wrong too. Here's one that I believe is correct, but it's not a free image: http://www.debhebert.com/LgPhotos/beebalm.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leotohill (talk • contribs) 01:05, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
The "Winnebago" don't call themselves that any more. They took back their own name: Ho Chunk. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.115.33.4 (talk) 18:23, 12 May 2009 (UTC)
This article mentions that the plants were used by the Blackfoot native americans, but the range of the plant does not show that it was present where the Blackfoot were. The section about it might properly be moved to the page on the Monarda genus?