Wikipedia talk:Wiki Ed/University of Washington/Physiology of Plant Behavior (Spring 2017)

Article Evaluation

Botany

"These gardens facilitated the academic study of plants. Efforts to catalogue and describe their collections were the beginnings of plant taxonomy, and led in 1753 to the binomial system of Carl Linnaeus that remains in use to this day" should have a citation in my opinion.
I don't understand the redirection to "Botany 'diambiguation'" in the header
History of botany seems mostly complete
Marine botany could be a section added
The human nutrition section could also be expanded to explain more about botany and the relationship with GMO's
On the talk page, people have added blurbs on fuller etymology and plant scientists. Personally, I don't think either of these additions are really necessary for this page. Etymology was already covered briefly in the beginning, and the plant scientist blurb was somewhat odd. I understand what this individual is getting at, however, how it was written was poor.
This page was rated as one of the Natural Sciences good article materials. Also as a level 3 vital article in Science.

Plant Physiology

Seems strange that there are no citations for the Aims section. Overall it seems that this information covers all aspects of the areas of plant physio, but information should be better cited.
Do all plants use all those micronutrients listed in the table? Perhaps a section on the effects of nutrient depletion could be added here.
In the section on plant hormones, the author claims "the most important hormones" for a plant, which is a subjective claim that is also not sourced.
Also in the hormone section, it seems confusing that hormones are defined for animals, but then this definition is basically contradicted for plants. Perhaps this area should be edited in order to make the definition for hormones more inclusive for plants.
Plant Behavior should definitely be a section for this page! Learning, memory, intelligence, and decision-making should all be discussed!
This page should mention that animals also have Cryptochrome proteins for circadian rhythms
The current research and economic application sections can definitely be expanded
Expanding and citing more articles are both on the "to-do list" for this page. Much agreed!
It was rated as a C-class article