| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Oleaceae article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This  level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
.svg){kind=small} | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Standard titles edit
Why is this article titled Olive family and not titled Oleaceae? Is there a accepted practice for this naming?Rmhermen 14:53 May 15, 2003 (UTC)
- Oddball I think. One could make a case that "olive family" etc is the "common name" and should therefore be preferred, but in practice everybody here that works on plants prefers the "aceae" name. Stan 00:19, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Digression edit
I am not really strict on the issue of drifting away from the topic, especially if the aside is of great interest. But, of course, there must be some limit to digression. I deleted the statements about endangered species, loss of habitat, etc., because it was really far from the topic of the article. I do not claim to telepathically know what someone is thinking, but i do know that the outward appearance is that the article was used as an opportunity to promote a pet cause. I have seen much of this in Wikipedia, but have rarely taken action against it. I believe that the activists need to be reminded of the general principle that the truth and importance of an idea does not imply that everybody needs to hear it all the time. 72.130.140.221 (talk) 00:00, 11 July 2014 (UTC)