Talk:Peucedanum ostruthium

Requested moves

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move the pages per the discussion below. In the case of Spurge Olive, there was clear consensus for a change; in the other two cases, it is apparent that confusion was possible at the previous titles and that the new ones are WP:PRECISE. Please adjust the redirects into set indices/disambiguation pages as necessary. Dekimasuよ! 22:43, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

---

• Masterwort → Peucedanum ostruthium
• Spurge Olive → Cneorum tricoccon
• Milk Parsley → Peucedanum palustre

– Current titles are ambiguous, and are more often used to refer to other plants besides the subject of the article. Move articles to unambiguous scientific names, in accord with WP:FLORA and disambiguate current vernacular ("common") name titles. Masterwort more commonly refers to Astrantia (especially the popular ornamental species Astrantia major ("great masterwort"). "Milk parsley" more commonly refers to species in the genus Selinum. "Spurge Olive" more commonly refers to species in the genus Daphne, especially Daphne mezereum (which is currently the redirect target of uncapitalized "spurge olive"). --Relisted. Dekimasuよ! 04:01, 30 October 2014 (UTC) Plantdrew (talk) 16:41, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

• Support – all of these are either too imprecise and/or actually not the commonest uses for the English names. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:01, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
• Comment - I'd like to see citations for the various common names, to support statements like "Spurge olive may also refer to the plants in the genus Daphne, especially Daphne mezereum", which is not supported either at Daphne (plant) nor at Daphne mezereum. Let me know if that proves difficult; there are books that could be searched and I have some. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 18:35, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Good point. I added (referenced) vernacular names to D. mezereum. On the flipside, there's no reference supporting the current title "spurge olive" for Cneorum tricoccon (and I'm not really seeing anything I'd consider reliable that identifies spurge olive with Cneorum); there needs to be as much burden of proof for the current vernacular name titles as there is for the names being ambiguous.Plantdrew (talk) 21:04, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Usually there is also a burden of proof for requesting page moves. Can you supply data here (from Google Books, etc.) to support your "more commonly" claims? This would make it easier to put the request through. Dekimasuよ! 16:46, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Still wondering if there is any evidence from reliable sources to support these changes. Dekimasuよ! 00:51, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

It might be easier to deal with these three cases separately rather than in a combined proposal. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 16:03, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

• Support moving Spurge Olive to Cneorum tricoccon - (1) Another capitalization, Spurge olive already redirects to Daphne mezereum, and has done so since 2006; it should be a set-index article (2) Cneorum tricoccon is native to the Western Mediterranean, so is not local to English-speaking areas where it would acquire an English vernacular name of common usage, and the plant has little interest to humans except to botanists. This is a case of scraping the bottom of the barrel to find a name, however rare, that could be said to be an English common name. Botanists have studied Cneorum tricoccon quite intensively because it at one time appeared to have a very surprisingly disjunct distribution in the Western Mediterranean and Cuba (it was later concluded that the Cuban collections were from a temporary population that resulted from material imported from Europe). The name used by botanists is preferable. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 19:07, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.