Talk:Orchidaceae/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Orchidaceae. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 18:01, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

"Seidenforchis" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Seidenforchis. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 15#Seidenforchis until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:04, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 17 August 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus

5 editors (including the proposer) support this move as being more WP:NATURAL and WP:RECOGNISABLE (and marginally more WP:CONCISE), while 7 editors oppose the move on the basis the current title is more WP:CONSISTENT and WP:PRECISE, so there is no consensus. (non-admin closure) Havelock Jones (talk) 07:22, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Orchidaceae → Orchid – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Twice as common in google scholar: 307k vs 174k results ([1] [2]). Vpab15 (talk) 15:58, 17 August 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 22:08, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Oppose "Orchid" can refer to other things, as per Orchid (disambiguation), whereas "Orchidaceae" is unambiguous. I get a lot of companies and a charity in the top four pages of Google hits, so the counts are not very convincing to me. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:45, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
The plant is already the primary topic in wikipedia. Orchid redirects here. There is no proposal to change that. The discussion is about what is the best name per commonname or other WP:CRITERIA. Vpab15 (talk) 16:58, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
It's not enough to count hits: you have to show they are relevant. Because "orchid" is part of the English name of many species, there are bound to be many hits. What has to be shown is that the family is more often called "orchid[s]" than "Orchidaceae". Looking at the Google Scholar hits I get, this simply isn't the case. Plus of course it must meet the precision requirement, which it doesn't. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:44, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Is it possible to obtain the numbers from WP itself? How many visits come in directly for "Orchidaceae" and how many are redirected from "Orchid"? Frdp (talk) 11:07, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
In most articles that use Orchidaceae, orchid is also used to refer to the family. They are used interchangeably. I haven't found any articles that use orchid in other way except to refer to the family. Could you share some details? How frequent are those articles? Vpab15 (talk) 22:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
A minority of hits appear to relate to "orchid bee[s]" (about 4,300). The real problem I have is when the term "orchid" is part of the English name for the genus, rather than a reference to the family, like "marsh orchid" (note that Google searches ignore hyphens, so "marsh-orchid" is the same as "marsh orchid"), "bee orchid", "moth orchid", "fringed orchid", "rein orchid", "slipper orchid", "butterfly orchid", "fly orchid", etc. Many of the searches for these combinations produce substantial numbers of hits, and so eat into the difference between the total hits in Google Scholar for "orchid" compared to "orchidaceae". I don't think there's a general way to find out how many hits are actually for English names which include "orchid", but it seems to me to be a significant part of the hits for "orchid". Making the move should require showing that "orchid" is the most common term in reliable sources for "Orchidaceae", and I don't accept that this has (yet) been done. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Maybe I didn't get your comment, but you are saying that some orchids like "bee orchid" have "orchid" in their name. Not exactly surprising, I'd say. It is like saying, we should rename bear to ursidae because bear can apply to polar bear, black bear and so on. Vpab15 (talk) 10:49, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
@Vpab15: I think you are missing my point. You started off by writing Twice as common in google scholar: 307k vs 174k results. This is relevant if, and only if, "orchid" is being used as a synonym for "Orchidaceae". But you have not shown that "orchid", used to mean "Orchidaceae", is 1.76 times as common (not twice as common), because many of the extra hits for "orchid" are not for the meaning "Orchidaceae" but for the English names of genera and species of orchids. Whether this accounts for the extra 133k hits you got is not clear; probably not, but you made the claim, so it's up to you to show that it is supported.
You should also consider WP:NCFLORA. Although undoubtedly members of the Orchidaceae have "horticultural, economic or cultural use", it's debatable whether for the family name this is more prominent than in botany. Peter coxhead (talk) 13:59, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
I understand your point. But how is this case different from the bear example or any other (like beetles or ants to name two)? Vpab15 (talk) 18:33, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
@Vpab15: it's different because WP:NCFLORA is different from WP:NCFAUNA. For plants, the default is the scientific name, and a case has to be made for the English name as a special case. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:19, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Frdp mentioned some examples of flora: moss, oak and fern. Pretty sure there are many more. No difference between those examples and orchids. Vpab15 (talk) 20:28, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Oppose For the same reasons given by Mr coxhead. "Orchid" can refer to, in addition to members of Orchidaeceae, a shade of purple, and several taxa of plants outside of Orchidaceae, i.e., the "orchid trees" of Bauhinia.--Mr Fink (talk) 21:55, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
This is not about WP:PRIMARYTOPIC as I responded above. Vpab15 (talk) 22:29, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Support per WP:CRITERIA. Far, far more recognizable and natural than the current title (and also more concise, though I don't think that's a major consideration). I am not concerned by the precision issue raised above, since it's already accepted that "orchid" meets the criteria for a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to this page. Colin M (talk) 01:44, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Support. Every single taxon within the family is referred to as 'orchid'. This is fairly unique for this rank (family). In Poaceae for example this is not the case and the move was voted out, but in other ranks (e.g. moss, oak, fern, ...) the move makes sense Frdp (talk) 07:08, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
Mosses and ferns are both phyla; it's not consistent but there is a definite tendency to use vernacular names for the phyla - see also flowering plant and conifer. In the case of flowering plant the competing taxonomic names (Angiospermae, Magnoliophyta, Anthophyta) was a motivation for using the vernacular. Lavateraguy (talk) 11:52, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Oppose All species in the family Orchidaceae are orchids, but not all orchids are in the Orchidaceae. Gderrin (talk) 00:47, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Could you give some examples? Vpab15 (talk) 10:45, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
See, as just one example, Poor-man's-orchid. Peter coxhead (talk) 14:02, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
"Poor-man's" in the name implies off the bat that it's not an orchid. That's like saying that we should move Stag beetle to Lucanidae because False stag beetles exist, or that Duck should be moved to Anatidae because Mock duck exists. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 18:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
A counterexample - dog's mercury is a mercury. Fool's parsley might be arguable either way - I'd define a parsley as an umbellifer with finely dissected leaves, which makes it a parsley. I'd also count trash bird as a counterexample. (In general, the "poor-mans" implies inferiority, not ersatzness.) Lavateraguy (talk) 11:42, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Support In terms of usage both seem roughly comparable, with "orchidaceae" in botanical contexts and "orchid" in common language, horticulture etc.. I also don't really think it's relevant that there are a bunch of other usages of "orchid" that are far less significant, and in most if not all cases derived from this usage. If we aren't going to use a disambiguation page directly (which we shouldn't here), I don't see how it matters which name the page ends up with. I think that it ultimately comes down to which name will be less surprising and confusing to readers. I think that just about everybody looking for "orchidaceae" is perfectly aware of what "orchid" means, whereas the vice versa is not true. I don't think we should be throwing latin at people searching for an English word without justification. Somatochlora (talk) 18:25, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
But see WP:NCFLORA. The long established guideline for plants is that we use the scientific name by default and there has to be a justification for using the English name, i.e. the reverse of your last sentence. In any case, searching is irrelevant, because the redirect exists. The question is solely what the article title should be and why NCFLORA's default should not be followed. Such a case can be made, but so far I don't see it being done. Peter coxhead (talk) 20:19, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Looking at WP:NCFLORA: "the vast majority of plants are of academic interest only to botanists, and botanists almost invariably use scientific names in their published works. On the other hand, when a plant is of interest outside botany—for example because it has agricultural, horticultural or cultural importance—then a vernacular name may be more common." Frdp (talk) 11:07, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Exactly, one only needs to check the section Orchidaceae#Uses to see the horticultural and cultural importance of orchids. It meets two of the three criteria to use the vernacular name. Vpab15 (talk) 11:50, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Oppose. Consistency is a virtue, and in this case consistency means using the formal taxonomic name for all plant taxa (per WP:NCFLORA). Lavateraguy (talk) 11:34, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment. Ngram shows orchid is around 14 times more common than Orchidaceae (see [3]). NCFLORA allows the use of the vernacular name in cases where its use is overwhelming, like this one. Vpab15 (talk) 11:46, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
    • Also worth checking google trends ([4]), which shows what people actually search. As expected, orchid is a much more common search item. Vpab15 (talk) 11:29, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
      • But are they searching for an article about the orchid family when they search for "orchid"? This has been the problem throughout when statistics are quoted comparing "orchid" with "Orchidaceae". The data is only relevant if the two are being used as synonyms. It's more likely in my view that people are searching for orchids as cut flowers or as house plants. Peter coxhead (talk) 14:34, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
        • that people are searching for orchids as cut flowers or as house plants. Yes, people searching for orchids using the word "orchid". The same way people would search for a cactus using the word "cactus". Vpab15 (talk) 14:53, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Support per "when a plant is of interest outside botany" part of WP:NCFLORA and (perhaps as importantly), the idea that "orchid" seems unproblematic. For example, it seems to be globally used rather than regional. And likewise for a bunch of other problems which might exist in general, but don't seem to exist for this particular case, at least according to what has been posted here so far. Kingdon (talk) 05:02, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Lavateraguy and Peter coxhead. By far, not all "Orchids" are Orchidaceae, and not all Orchidaceae are called orchids.--Kevmin § 23:33, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose Scientific names are WP:CONSISTENTly used as article title for all but one other plant family (Cactus). Please provide evidence that the title Orchidaceae is making it difficult for readers to find this article via the internet. Redirects work. WP:COMMONNAME was written at a time when Wikipedia wasn't necessarily returned at a high rank by search engines. Plantdrew (talk) 04:15, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
    • I don't have to provide evidence that Orchidaceae is making it difficult for readers to find this article via the internet. I have to provide evidence that "orchid" is the common term used in google scholar and in ngrams and it is the name an average reader will search. That has been done by me and other editors above. Also, per NCFLORA we should use the name "orchids" since they have an an agricultural, horticultural, economic or cultural role or use that makes it more prominent in some other field than in botany. None of the opposers have refuted that point. Vpab15 (talk) 08:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
      • @Vpab15: I'm reluctant to keep making the same point, but what you have not shown is that "orchid" in agricultural, horticultural, economic or cultural uses refers to the family Orchidaceae and so to the article that has been constructed for the family as per the usual WP:PLANTS template. I very much doubt that people searching for "orchid" want to read the Taxonomy section, for example. The great bulk of orchid genera do not have agricultural, horticultural, economic or cultural uses. I agree that some groups of orchids definitely have such uses, and there is in my view a case for a separate article on the horticultural use of orchids – much of which involves complex artificially created grexes and cultivars, which have little to do with the botany of the Orchidaceae. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:15, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
        • So, unless I can show every single species in the family Orchidaceae has agricultural, horticultural, economic or cultural uses, we shouldn't move the article. That is an impossible task and totally unreasonable. From the article: there are 28,000 currently accepted species, distributed in about 763 genera. Vpab15 (talk) 10:31, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
          • @Vpab15: that's not what I wrote. The point is that most of the 28,000 species have no human use. Compare this with something like wheat, where most of the 5 or 6 species of Triticum have some agricultural connection, justifying the use of the vernacular. Peter coxhead (talk) 18:58, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
        • @Peter coxhead: If you don't think the present article satisfies typical users who are searching for "Orchid" then surely the current redirect at Orchid is inappropriate? What do you suppose should be done with that name instead? Should we have a separate broad-concept article covering the agricultural, horticultural, economic and cultural uses of flowers which are commonly referred to as orchids? Should it go to a disambiguation page? Colin M (talk) 15:35, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
          • @Colin M: if there are editors willing to construct one, I would support a "broad-concept article" as you suggest. "Orchid" could then be a dab page or could go to one with an appropriate hatnote to the other. Peter coxhead (talk) 16:38, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose orchid does not always refer to members of this family; additionally WP:Consistency applies as others have pointed out. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 00:40, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 10 July 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. To better fit the criteria for article titles. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:07, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Orchidaceae → Orchid – Second try after the previous discussion above. Orchid is the common name of the plant family in google scholar ([5] [6]). Even the article itself uses orchid more than the technical term. Orchid better satisfies the five WP:CRITERIA:

  • It is more recognizable than the technical term.
  • It is more natural. Again, most readers will search using the common, non-techical term.
  • It is precise enough. Orchid already redirects here and is the clear WP:PrimaryTopic. Saying "orchid can mean other things" goes against primary topic policy, which is a core policy followed by many, many other articles. Like apple, another plant term which is much more ambiguous than orchid, but is also the primary topic.
  • It is more concise.
  • It is consistent with other plant taxa like ferns, oaks, cactus and others which use the common, vernacular name rather than the techical one.

It is also in line with WP:FLORATITLES, since orchids have an agricultural, horticultural, economic or cultural role or use that makes it more prominent in some other field than in botany. Probably the horticultural role is the most prominent, but orchids also have an important cultural role per Orchidaceae#Cultural symbolism.

Finally, there was an argument in the previous RM that "not all Orchids are Orchidaceae". Apart from the primary topic policy mentioned above, the dictionary definition is that an orchid is a member of Orchidaceae ([7]). There was also the argument that I need to show all the 28,000 orchid species have "orchid" in their name. But that is obviously impossible to do. And it is not how naming works in general, since all orchids are also monocots, but they are not necessarily called with that name. It fact they are almost never called using that name.

To sum up, established policies and guidelines strongly support changing the name to "orchid". Vpab15 (talk) 11:11, 10 July 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:38, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

  • Comment I think the most compelling part of the argument above for me was that not all orchids fall into Orchidaceae. Should 'Orchid' be an article with a paraphyletic box detailing this in full? YorkshireExpat (talk) 17:08, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
    As far as I can see, reliable sources use the terms Orchidaceae and orchid interchangeably. Are there any examples of that paraphyletic grouping you mention? If not, I would oppose per WP:No original research. Vpab15 (talk) 19:49, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
    Not, that I know. I'm not an expert and my web searches haven't gotten me very far. YorkshireExpat (talk) 21:12, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment I can only repeat the point I made above: is "orchid" an appropriate title for an article about the botanical family Orchidaceae? One of the illustrated talks I give is called "British Orchids", and includes images of all the genera of Orchidaceae native to Britain. But I am constantly made aware that many of them (e.g. Ophrys apifera, Spiranthes romanzoffiana, Dactylorhiza viridis) are not recognized as "orchids" by most of my audience. To most people, "orchid" refers to the large flowered exotic species, like Phalaenopsis. Hence I believe that "orchid" is not recognizable or natural as a reference to the botanical family. Peter coxhead (talk) 00:22, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
    I did a quick search of the examples you provided. Unsurprisingly they are usually defined as orchids. Do you have any evidence based on reliable sources that refer to any of the 28,000 Orchidaceae species as "not an orchid"? Vpab15 (talk) 09:12, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
    @Vpab15: of course I and other botanically knowledgeable people know that these species are orchids, and would call them that. That isn't my point at all, which is that, based on personal experience, "orchid" is not the most recognizable or natural term for the family as a whole for general readers. One of the problems with these AT criteria is that there's no easy way to determine recognizability or naturalness to most readers, hence my resort to personal experience.
However, we are repeating old arguments. If you don't have any new ones, you should respect the outcome of the previous RM. You can't keep proposing an RM again just because you don't like the previous outcome. It's an abuse of process. Peter coxhead (talk) 14:08, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
If orchid is not the most recognizable or natural term for the family for general readers, I don't know what is. Definitely not the relatively obscure "Orchidaceae", which only plant experts would be aware of.
However, we are repeating old arguments. Well, at least you are not repeating your previous argument that "Orchid can refer to other things", which goes against WP:PrimaryTopic, so I'd call that progress. Regarding your accusations about abuse of process, please see WP:AGF. I am trying to bring the title of this page in line with established naming policy. It is you who insists on the scientific name without saying how that option is supported by policy. Vpab15 (talk) 20:32, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
AGF works both ways. It's less than a year since the last discussion. Why do you assume that the decision of the closer based on the previous discussion needs to be overturned? Peter coxhead (talk) 22:30, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
First, consensus can change (see WP:CCC). Second, there is no existing consensus to overturn, since the previous discussion was closed as no consensus. Third, I made quite an effort in my nominating statement to explain why existing policies support the change. Compare that to my previous nominating statement. In response, I'd expect some opposing arguments based on policies and guidelines. I don't think any has been provided. Vpab15 (talk) 22:55, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per the well reasoned nomination. Orchid is a superior title for the reasons mentioned and especially per WP:FLORATITLES. Orchids are extremely culturally and horticulturally significant, more so than they are botanically, just as much as roses are.--Cerebral726 (talk) 12:57, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Support per nomination, most familiar name in English, and common name. Thanks for nominating this page. Randy Kryn (talk) 23:57, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Support In almost no other general knowledge encyclopedia would that named topic be missing, so we are sorely missing an article at the Orchid title. If there is no better WP:BROADCONCEPT page to put in its place, then this one will suffice. -- Netoholic @ 07:17, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Support One of many plant articles that are at Latin names despite having a better title in English, for reasons that I can't entirely understand. I have six books on my shelf about this family and all use "orchid" in the title.Somatochlora (talk) 19:59, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
The case I have not seen made is that "orchid" is a better title for the average reader for an article about the botanical family, as opposed to an article about orchids in cultivation – an article we need in my view. Peter coxhead (talk) 12:26, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose for the reasons explained in the earlier RfC. I strongly object to this being raised again so soon. "Keep on asking until you get the answer you want" seems to be what is going on here. Peter coxhead (talk) 12:26, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose - "Orchidaceae" is the precise and unambiguous term that encompasses all the orchid plants but excludes other uses such as a colour. There is already a redirect at "Orchid" so that there is no obligation on users to know the correct and precise term. To change this to Orchid would stand against a long held and well established convention on the naming of plant family articles.  Velella  Velella Talk   21:55, 23 July 2022 (UTC)
    As explained in the nomination, the proposal is in line with WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, a widely followed guideline. Do you think the plant family is not the primary topic? Regarding naming conventions, again this is already mentioned in the nomination. Per WP:FLORATITLES, says we should use the vernacular name when a plant has an agricultural, horticultural, economic or cultural role or use that makes it more prominent in some other field than in botany. Do you disagree that orchids have a prominent horticultural, economic or cultural role in accordance to WP:FLORATITLES? Vpab15 (talk) 09:09, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
When another editor starts with "As explained in the nomination...." my hackles start to rise. However I shall try not be provoked and AGF that the patronising tone was unintended. Let me start with WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. This relates to Disambiguation decisions which is not relevant here so can be discounted immediately. With regard to WP:FLORATITLES the wording states Scientific names are to be used as article titles in all cases except when a plant has an agricultural, horticultural, economic or cultural role or use that makes it more prominent in some other field than in botany. So we have, quite correctly, Vanilla as the article tile for the spice and Vanilla planifolia for the plant. Very few other tropical orchids have common English names. Many temperate clime terrestrial orchids have common names, often more than one, but all the articles are, correctly, at their scientific names (Cf Platanthera hyperborea or Orchis mascula). Many orchids have horticultural significance and even on supermarket shelves these are identified by there scientific names or as a named cultivar. The policy wording is quite clear that it is ...a plant.., not a family of plants, or an order of plants, but "a plant". This article is not about "a plant" , it is about one of the most diverse, complex and cosmopolitan plant families on earth. I can see no justification in the policies and conventions of Wikipedia for changing the title of this article and no merits in the arguments put forward for such a change. I remain strongly opposed to the change.  Velella  Velella Talk   09:49, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
You raised the precision issue and I pointed you to my nomination, where I explain my reasoning for why saying "orchid can mean other things" goes against WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. In your response, you immediately discount the issue you raised yourself. It is going to be quite difficult to have any sort of meaningful discussion if you immediately discount what other editors say. Regarding your second point, if I understand correctly your objection is that orchid doesn't encompass all species in the plant family. Almost all scientific articles I have read use the terms orchid and Orchidaceae interchangeably. Pretty much all sources regard the two terms as synonyms. It is true that naming the article "orchids" will make it more clear that the article is about a plant family composed of many species, and not just one, but that goes against WP:PLURAL. In general, wikipedia uses the singular and the article human for example deals with the whole of humankind (which redirects to the singular). Vpab15 (talk) 10:33, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
Regarding the wording used at FLORATITLES, "a plant" mean all the plants that fall into the category in question, be that a species, genus (like oak) or family (like cactus or orchid). Taking that argument to the extreme, one could argue that the convention should only apply to individual plants, like General Sherman (tree). Vpab15 (talk) 11:12, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Orchidaceae/Archive_1&oldid=1219802825"