Talk:Banksia brownii

Untitled

• Talk archive: Talk:Banksia brownii/Archive

Translated

To all editors and contributants: This article has been translated due to its quite high quality in the German Wikipedia with only a few (rather formal) modifications as an X-mas gift. Thanks to everybody, who made the translation a worthy and joyous work. If you like to have a look: de:Banksia brownii. Best regards, Denisoliver 00:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

attractive

Someone removed the word "attractive" from the intro, because it is subjective. I have restored it. I believe the notion that Wikipedia should not report any subjective positions or opinions to be a common misconception that leads to dry writing. We certainly shouldn't be presenting the subjective opinions of the article contributors, but there is nothing wrong with reporting published subjective opinions of suitably qualified people. And if all such opinions are the same, then it is appropriate to present the opinion as universally held. That is the case here: every published work on B. brownii that has taken into account aesthetic considerations (e.g. cultivation value) has considered it to be an attractive plant. Therefore I hold that Wikipedia is justified in referring to it as such. Hesperian 04:12, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

As per WP:LEAD the lead is a summary of the article, the use of attractive is supported by a citation in the section on cultivation(reference #3) Gnangarra 08:04, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Protection

Why is this article not protected? All FA articles should be. Chapparal 19:58, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Main Page featured article protection.--cj | talk 22:34, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, was unaware as to the policy, just wondering as I had noticed FA's no longer being protected Chapparal 07:43, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

THIS ARTICLE IS CRAP?

What is this "This article is crap" infobox and why hasn't it been removed? I can't find it in the code. -82.182.50.47 12:55, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I can't find it either. I don't know what's up. 1337 |-|@><><0r? 24.131.157.78 22:42, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Notes on population changes over time

1988	The Banksia Atlas	18 known populations, 12 estimated to have <100 plants, 10 estimated to have <10 plants
1995	Kelly & Coates; Robinson & Coates; SPRAT	18 populations: one with 1000-2000 plants; one with 100 to several hundred; the rest with <100 plants.
1996		Large population found in Waychinicup National Park
1996	Collines et al	—
1997	Day et al	About 15 disjunct populations
2001		Large population found in Cheyne Road Nature Reserve
October 2005	Draft Recovery Plan	17 populations, about 10,000 mature plants, 10 populations presumed extinct
2005	Cochrane et al	17 populations, about 12,000 mature plants, 10 populations presumed extinct, 5 have >200 plants
January 2008	Recovery Plan	20 populations totalling about 19500 plants, 10 more populations presumed extinct, 3/20 have <15 plants; 3/20 have 100-200; 4+ have >200. Only one population is in healthy vegetation adequately removed from P. cinn.

Hesperian 13:39, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Notes on host-specific native pathogens

Dumping this here for now; it might merit working into the article at some point. Cochrane reckons that the loss of this species "may have unforeseen, and potentially disastrous, consequences for the functioning of the vegetation communities of which feather-leaved banksia is an integral part." That always seemed a bit over the top to me (in her defence she was writing in a pop magazine not a scientific journal). Below is a more specific, more plausible example of the possible ecological impact of the species' decline:

"In the case of introduced pathogens like P. cinnamomi that have devastated the entire population of their host species, Banksia brownii, any host-specific native parasites must have undergone a devastating (and undocumented!) decline if not extinction."

- slightly paraphrased from Perkins, Sarah E.; et al. (2008). "Invasion biology and parasitic infections". In Ostfeld, Richard S. et al. (eds.) (ed.). Infectious Disease Ecology. England: Princeton University Press. pp. 179–204. ISBN 069112485X. {{cite book}}: |editor= has generic name (help); Explicit use of et al. in: |author= (help)

Hesperian 00:36, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

http://www.midsussextimes.co.uk/news/rare_aussie_plant_flowers_for_the_first_time_at_wakehurst_1_2396083 Hesperian 00:53, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

http://www.sciencewa.net.au/topics/environment-a-conservation/item/1455-critically-endangered-wa-flora-translocated-to-multiple-locations Hesperian 00:43, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm, not many specifics in that - and 2008 link not working for me. Does it say the same thing? Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:20, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

WP:URFA/2020 notes

This one's still in fairly good shape, although there's a few issues. There's some uncited text in the taxonomy section, and the population statistics and the material in the conservation section about specific numbers and initiatives could use an update, as it's mainly stuff approaching 10 years ago or more. Hog Farm _Bacon 05:26, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Okay, will take a look Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:31, 5 April 2021 (UTC) have added references and updated material on conservation. Sad as apart from translocation, can't see too much published. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:05, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

@Hog Farm: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:32, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

@Casliber: - This one's looking satisfactory, although I do feel like something is off with Seed survival rates are similarly low. Department of Environment and Conservation. And it also seems odd to say It is estimated that without protective measures in place, it would be extinct within a decade when the source estimating this was published over two decades ago. Is it possible to get a citation for Direct injection of phosphite into the stem of each tree appears to lack this disadvantage, but is costly to administer and restricted to known plants.? Hog Farm _Talk 01:05, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

The first looks like a cut and paste gone wrong and removed. Looking into the second. Removed the "extinct within a decade" segment as sort of labouring the point. Looking into the last. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:18, 2 December 2021 (UTC)