Talk:Commelina cyanea

A fact from Commelina cyanea appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 28 April 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Australian creeping plant Commelina cyanea (pictured) is known as scurvy weed as early settlers ate it to ward off scurvy?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2011/April.

Wikipedia

Plants Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia: Biota Low‑importance

	Australia portal Commelina cyanea is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Commelina cyanea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070420162448/http://asgap.org.au/c-cya.html to http://asgap.org.au/c-cya.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:49, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting edits by anonymous editor 119.15.78.30

Hello 119.15.78.30, and thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. I have reverted most of the work you did today on this article, specifically that which referenced a thesis from a student at Flinders University, because I don't believe that the referenced paper has credence botanically (and let me make it clear that this is not a judgement on any other aspect of the paper). My reasons:

Firstly, the paper has errors. For example:

There are two species of Commelina [...] called “Scurvy Weed” Commelina cyanea and “Climbing Dayflower”
Commelina diffusa (www.inaturalist.org). However, the only genus that is Australian native is Scurvy Weed

Points: a) The word 'genus' should be 'species'; b) Which "scurvy weed" is the author referring to? The author appears to be unaware of the unresolved taxonomic differences that exist between the NSW Herbarium and the Qld Herbarium (Qld does not recognise Commelina cyanea), and indeed broader taxonomic concerns for all species of Commelina in Australia.

Secondly, the author does not cite any of the authoritative herbariums in Australia and does not provide a list of references given, even though there are citations throughout the paper.

Also, there is no mention in the paper that the "alternative names are not regularly used".

Again let me repeat that this is not a criticism of the paper as a whole, but just the worthiness of it as a botanical reference, nor is it a criticism of your efforts. Please consider creating a user account for yourself here. Junglenut |Talk 10:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]