Talk:Botany

Not relevant? It’s a link to an article pertaining to botany. I removed "Still, the microbes are usually covered, somewhat superficially, in most introductory Botany courses." This would require to cite the country where this is still true.

ant

Still true in the United States. Although many courses do limit themselves to higher plants, many still cover all of the groups traditionally studied by "biotanists" - Marshman 23:06, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Contents

1 List of topics in Biology 1 Plant-Pictures 2 I read this quote on the page with regard to Barbara McClintock 3 Help requested for Cotton plant

List of topics in Biology

Personally, I do not care whether there is such a list on each of the biology topic pages. I'm not going to get sucked into edit war over something that is not my addition. But I will register here my protest over User:Maveric149 once again poor performance in handling this issue. - Marshman 17:16, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The botany article has undergone quite a few changes recently, what do people think? Does it follow the NPOV etiquette? I can't tell because I've got degree in Plant Sciences so I'm a bit biased. How can it be made better? Bornslippy 15:33, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Plant-Pictures

Hi

I am a german wikipedia-contributer (nickname lumbar). I own a lot pictures (GFPL) of plants, all names in the latin scheme (the names have been verified by two biologie-professors of my university).

Here you can find the galeries:

A-M

N-Z

All photos are in wikicommons. I hope you can make good use of them! lumbar

Very nice. Danke sehr - Marshman 05:34, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I read this quote on the page with regard to Barbara McClintock

Although she was not a classical 'botanist'

I find it hard to agree with this statement. What is a classical botanist? McClintock worked with plants to understand cytogenetics and epigenetics. She is definitely a botanist, even a 'classical' botanist. This page should be helping people understand that the term botanist is quite broad. This sentence seems to imply that botanist only do taxonomy of plants. I think it should be changed. David D. 17:28, 11 May 2005 (UTC)

I think what you say proves the statement is essentially correct. A "classical botanist" is one steeped in taxonomy. It not at all implies that "botanist only do taxonomy of plants" since it clearly states a "classical botanist". As time passes, what is classical might change, but there is presently nothing wrong with the statement. I think you are misinterpreting "classical" to mean something like "real"—not the case. Think of "classical" as meaning "ancient". - Marshman 04:51, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi Marshman, I suppose I am wondering if classical has any meaning. Was Hooke classical? He used a microscope in the same way as McClintock. Was Mendel classical? He used genetics in the same way as McClintock. Personally, I think she was a classical botanist. I prefer to see it in the terms of botantists being leaders in the biological sciences rather than botanists breaking with the traditions of classical botany. Does that make sense? David D. 15:25, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

I think it has a meaning, and that is the meaning intended by the statement. I'd have not thought of putting it that way myself and do not even know if it fits in her case; but you are dissecting a term that does convey an admittedly vague concept of what botanists mostly did in the "classical period". One could similarly say, she was a "modern botanist", and no one would argue that that simply is not true because Hooke (decidely not "modern") also used a microscope! - Change the statement to something more descriptive of the field as she practiced it if you like - Marshman 18:03, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

O.K. I went in and changed it quite a bit. I hope it is appropriate. Feel free to edit it into shape. David D. 23:06, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

I'd say that got the details in there and a vast improvement - Marshman 23:08, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Help requested for Cotton plant

Can anyone help out with a classification issue at Talk:Cotton plant? RK 17:34, May 11, 2005 (UTC)