Talk:Cynanchum laeve

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 10 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): DaniiB1, JowFirr123.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled

HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM :S I'm having trouble getting 'Honeyvine' to redirect to this page. If anyone knows what's wrong and how to get it to work, feel free! Aunukia (talk) 00:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 September 2018 and 17 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JillianKurolvech.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

This article is currently massively POV-biased — agricultural propaganda

"Noxious weed" is written at least four times. The definition of "noxious weed" is debatable, something that should be made clear every time it is brought up in articles. For instance, this plant is a very valuable host plant for monarch butterflies and other beneficial native insects. Imagine a property, for example, that has a lot of fencing that the owner could use this vine with to help to support the insect population. Honeyvine has been shown, in research, to produce a lot of nectar, which pollinators need. My opinion, which I believe is much more rational than the opinion expressed relentlessly in this article is that the true noxious forms of this plant genus, in North America, are those that are population sinks for the monarch butterfly. Those species attract the butterflies but the offspring laid on them will not survive because they are toxic to the caterpillars. This species, by contrast, is an effective supporter of monarch larvae. Its rapid growth and vining habit are ideal for some circumstances. The entirety of the world's ecosystem function does not revolve around the desires, needs, and prejudices of corporate agriculture. Many beneficial plants are being propagandized against by the agricultural lobby, without their benefits being given a fair shake. There is a lot of scaremongering in the United States in particular, such as what is going on with yellow rattle. In the UK, people can buy it by the kilogram to avoid having to dump chemicals to reduce grass dominance for wildflower meadows. But, in this country, all of the literature makes the plant sound like the second coming of the antichrist. Somehow agriculture hasn't collapsed in the UK despite the wide availability of yellow rattle. In fact, corporate agriculture and development is doing so well there that there has been a 56% drop in butterfly populations in the first ten years of this century. Bull thistle is being banned in state after state even though monarchs relied on large tall thistles like it for migration nectar. Who cares about the monarch, though? People are under the wrong impression, that planting some butterflyweed (orange milkweed) in a garden is all that's needed. Wikipedia should not be a passive extension-type mouthpiece of the corporate farming lobby. It has way more power and influence than it should have already. Calling for the destruction and banning of this plant, with the arguably "noxious weed" label, is reckless and harmful, with what I have seen about this species in the research. Good luck finding another temperate vine that supports monarchs, is this tough, and which produces so much nectar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.216.159.160 (talk) 03:25, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

You are correct. The term was not supported by the sources, so I removed it. The sentences about it being problematic for farmers are neutral and were left in the article. --ThaddeusB (talk) 00:02, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi - It appears that this species (Cynanchum laeve (Michx.) Pers.) is a synonym and that the accepted name is Ampelamus laevis (Michx.) Krings - see: plants of the world online Gcopenhaver1 (talk) 01:27, 28 May 2020 (UTC)Gcopenhaver1