Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of nitrogen-fixing-clade families/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 00:26, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of nitrogen-fixing-clade families edit

List of nitrogen-fixing-clade families (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): - Dank (push to talk) 13:45, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is it, we're almost done with this Featured List series for flowering plant families. It's been a long, productive journey, and here we are. The rosids are generally divided into the fabids (named for the fava bean family) and malvids, and the nitrogen-fixing clade is a large clade (a group of related species) within the fabids. There's a lot here that will be familiar to almost everyone ... roses, apples, cucumbers, legumes, Cannabis. Comments are welcome. Basic licensing information for the images is on the list talk page. Malpighiales is handled in a separate table, with less data and no images, because some readers have problems with images not loading when the tables are longer than these, or when there are too many images. A hatnote directs readers to a gallery of images for almost all the families at Malpighiales. (Or, I could change the name of the list to "List of fabid families (except for Malpighiales)" or "List of non-Malpighiales fabid families", if you like.) - Dank (push to talk) 03:49, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from PresN and Dank (push to talk) 14:28, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
:Unless I'm missing something, nothing in the list explains why you have the Malpighiales families separate here, and in a different format? Also, the lead says there's eight orders but lists seven; the eighth, is of course, Malpighiales. --PresN 15:19, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Added, thanks. The answer was on the list's talk page; I'll add it above. I don't want to go into too much detail on the talk page (and none in article-space) because the situation is slightly embarrassing; we're dealing with a mediawiki bug here that, for some reason, hasn't been fixed in a very long time. (But I don't have a strong feeling about this; you're welcome to disagree.) - Dank (push to talk) 15:56, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Cutting off just Malpighiales into its own list seems awkward namewise; taxonomically it's slit between Celastrales/Oxalidales/Malpighiales and the other 5. Size-wise, that's 30 rows for the Nitrogen-fixing group, 2 for Celastrales, 9 for Oxalidales, and 36 for Malpighiales (83 total). So, a split of 30 and 47. Do you know about where the line is for the issue? Is 47 too long?
Well, let's take this one step at a time. I can tell you that 59 is too many families, so I'll stop working on the 59-family malvids for now, because there's no similar solution available (other than the one I'm proposing here, breaking off one order, Brassicales). I have no objection to renaming this list to "List of nitrogen-fixing-clade families"; all I have to do is throw out Zygophyllales, Celastrales, Oxalidales and Malpighiales. If anyone objects to that approach, say something soon. I'm not personally interested in doing a Celastrales/Oxalidales/Malpighiales list; that clade has a silly (and possibly out-of-fashion) name, it's a relatively recent addition to the APG series, and I don't know what sources I would use for the clade as a whole. (Sources for Malpighiales alone are better.) But someone else might be interested in doing it, which would be fine. Striking, and pondering. - Dank (push to talk) 17:21, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I will say, I've never heard of this issue- List of carnivorans, for example, has 236 images and it never came up. Can you link the issue report? --PresN 16:22, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've never looked for the issue report. I've been told by several users over the years (including by User:ChrisTheDude) that random images stopped loading on my long plant lists roughly when we had 900 or 1000 rows, and on my other lists at roughly the 100-image point. I've seen this issue just a few times myself, but I can't reproduce it reliably, I think it depends on the machine and the browser. - Dank (push to talk) 17:21, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Normally, I like to wait a little longer for feedback before acting on a request that would change the title and the contents, but there's a risk here that reviewers will waste time reviewing stuff that then gets deleted. Happy to follow through on your advice, PresN, and I'll make the changes. I'll mark this resolved ... feel free to revert if you disagree. - Dank (push to talk) 14:26, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ceoil edit

Placeholder

  • Think your not placing enough emphasis on Cannabis' societal importance (vs simple use as material for fabric and rope) in the lead. That it has served spiritual/ceremonial/recreational purposes for at least the last 2400 years is certainly lead worthy. The note in the list entry however is very well done.
    • Done.
  • Overall, I'd prefer a more substantial lead.
    • I've expanded both paragraphs in the lead, and as a bonus, I added a link for "temperate" so that we don't have to link it in every row. - Dank (push to talk)
  • Excellent addition to the series. More later. Ceoil (talk) 00:57, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Ceoil: Delighted with your edits ... they bring up really interesting issues, as always (although, since this is the last in the series for a while, it's too late in the day to go through all the previous lists changing every "scattered", I think). If you'd hold off editing for a few minutes, I'm going to follow PresN's advice and toss out 4 of the orders. - Dank (push to talk) 14:22, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
np Ceoil (talk) 15:59, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done for now. Carry on. - Dank (push to talk) 16:49, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I see you have addressed the above and those implied via my edit summaries. I'm happy here; as usual crisp and spare writing, top notch sourcing, beautiful illustrations, and clearly explained annotations. What more could be asked for. Ceoil (talk) 22:02, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Very kind. Regarding your question about whether this is the end ... I'm going to give the COM clade a shot. I'm leaving one column in the malvids blank to encourage others to participate. Elizabeth is working on the campanulids. And that will finish up the flowering plant families. - Dank (push to talk) 02:30, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pseud 14 edit

  • Perhaps shrubs and vines could be linked
  • Would it be helpful if the full name of THC is written?
    • Done.
  • I'm assuming the instances red-links are articles that would be created soon?
    • For the people who are namesakes of plant genera, I have kind of a standard answer for that. In this list, I see one such red link, for Joseph Surian. I first mentioned him in List of plant genera named for people (Q–Z). If you go to the talk page of that list and look in "Notes", you'll see that there used to be a link to the relevant section of his Wikidata entry (but that was removed in this edit). That shows you that he's considered notable enough for articles in the German and French Wikipedias, and those articles provide some helpful information.
    • There's one plant species with a red link. Plant species are always assumed to be notable, per WP:SPECIES. If you're asking me to request that these articles be created, I can do that; I'd prefer not to write them myself.
      • Thank you for clarifying this and providing your rationale. I don't see the red-links as hindrance for my providing my support.
  • That's all from me. Another well-structured and informative work. Pseud 14 (talk) 00:38, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Pseud 14, kind of you to say that, and thanks for the review. - Dank (push to talk) 03:37, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • I am satisfied with the above and I am happy to support for promotion. Great work. Pseud 14 (talk) 11:32, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support from HAL edit

Happy to support. A look-over found nothing of concern. ~ HAL333 20:00, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Hal. Does that include the sources? I'm asking because Giants put this on the source-review-needed list a couple of days ago. - Dank (push to talk) 22:21, 16 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not. Source formatting isn't my forte. ~ HAL333 12:12, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Source review – The references all appear to be well-formatted and reliable, and the link-checker turned up no concerns. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:23, 18 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image review – The photos/illustrations have appropriate captions and alt text, and the ones I reviewed had proper free licenses. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:26, 23 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting. --PresN 15:18, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_nitrogen-fixing-clade_families/archive1&oldid=1156858990"