Template:Did you know nominations/Saxifraga bryoides, Saxifraga aspera

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:14, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Saxifraga bryoides, Saxifraga aspera[edit]

( Back to T:TDYK )
( Article history links:
)

Mossy saxifrage flower

Created/expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nom at 05:42, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

The articles are long enough (just!), and new enough, but I have concerns about the hook. Not only is it not contained in the articles, but it seems to be directly contradicted by them. Both articles state that the two species are distinguished by the relatives lengths of the leaf buds and their protecting leaves, without mentioning differences in the petal spotting. I also think we should probably be using more up-to-date sources than those from 1897 and 1904; a lot can change in 100 years, particularly in "difficult" genera like Saxifraga. Also note that the German name for S. bryoides is not "moosartiger steinbrech", but either Moos-Steinbrech (further interwiki links also listed there) or Moosartiger Steinbrech; the uppercase initials are mandatory. (The same applies to the Rau-Steinbrech.) --Stemonitis (talk) 11:50, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


  • Although the two articles do not mention the number of petal spots specifically as being a difference between them, each article does mention the number of spots on the petals of that species. The leaf axil bud is stated as "a" fact that distinguishes between the two species but there are no doubt other distinguishing features. Although my sources are old (I found some ancient Alpine floras in my bookcase), I would not have been able to find much information about these plants without them. I found it difficult to formulate an interesting hook. How about

Hmm..., no, that doesn't seem particularly interesting. There are many Alpine plants in Europe, and "here are two" doesn't seem remarkable at all. If they were the highest (which is generally quoted as Ranunculus glacialis or Saxifraga biflora), that might be something, but up to 3000 m is nothing remarkable. This chapter of a 2008 book provides a fair amount of information: they're the only European species in the (otherwise [sub-]Arctic or amphi-Pacific) section, for instance. The flowers are similar in size, it says, but the foliage is very different.

I think it only fair to warn you that I think both articles will need a fair bit of work before I'm comfortable recommending they be featured on the front page. There's a lot of stuff in there that seems unlikely. For instance, the supposed source for S. bryoides growing in "the mountains of Eastern Europe" is a website which contains no such information, probably because you've linked to the wrong species, but even then there's only a (political) map to suggest it, and that's probably wrong. Hegi (1937: Alpenflora) lists "Riesengebirge, Karpaten, Balkan", which wouldn't seem to include Hungary or Moldova (nor is "Moldavia" listed here), but Moldova is shaded on that map, for instance. According to Flora Iberica, S. aspera occurs in the Apennines as well, but neither species occurs in Iberia outside the Pyrenees. None of this is well described in the articles ("most of the European mountain ranges" is very subjective and probably unjustifiable). I haven't checked the details of the morphology sections, but they doesn't seem to be saying quite the same things as the sources I've seen. If you can re-work the articles within the next few days, with newer sources and more reliable information, then we can consider continuing. I don't think I'm being unduly harsh here; getting the information right is critically important (and I know you can produce better articles than this). --Stemonitis (talk) 13:33, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

  • In light of what Stemonitis says, I am withdrawing this nomination. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:09, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Saxifraga_bryoides,_Saxifraga_aspera&oldid=829256524"