Talk:Lycaste

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lycaste. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:15, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Issue with Lycaste sections[edit]

I was going thru this article to add the Species section. The original editor broke species into taxonomic sections. There appears to be an ongoing dispute between Oakeley's taxonomic sections of Lycaste and Fowlie's.

I came to this realisation when I went to add Lycaste schilleriana to the list of species ... and could not find which of Oakeley's sections it belonged in: it seems everyone I could find places it in Fowlie's Section Lycaste.

I think the discussion of (taxonomic) sections has value, but don't think the species list should be split by section.

Any feedback and/or suggestions? Prime Lemur (talk) 06:37, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Additional: for extra clarity, Fowlie's sectioning was in 1970, Oakeley's in 2008. The following url has some discussion of the differences, and monograph titles of the two authors:

WA Orchid Society: Lycaste

Prime Lemur (talk) 06:49, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]