Talk:Lotus (genus)

Significance of this plant in religion such as the occult, and buddhism is that it mimicks the earth's magnetic field, which mimicks the sun's invisible magnetic field from outside its heliosphere. The sun travels upwards whilst the earth does so horizontally to the galactic plain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.255.25.193 (talk) 02:17, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lotus (genus). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110608014248/http://nlbif.eti.uva.nl/bis/flora.php?selected=beschrijving&menuentry=soorten&record=Lotus to http://nlbif.eti.uva.nl/bis/flora.php?selected=beschrijving&menuentry=soorten&record=Lotus

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) 16:59, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Changed genera

The article was flagged by Plantsurfer in this edit in November 2016 as needing attention "from an expert". I'm certainly not an expert in the area, but I have tried to tackle the problem as it's been flagged for a while now. It's clear from primary sources with good molecular phylogenies that the North American species formerly placed in Lotus should be split off. However, it's less clear exactly how this should be done, and reliable secondary sources differ; they also don't all contain a complete treatment of Lotus which is necessary to ensure self-consistency. After some research, I've used Plants of the World Online's treatment. I don't think it's the most up-to-date, and further moves may be needed, but (a) it implements the New World–Old World split (b) it's comprehensive (c) it includes distributions as well as synonyms. I've moved all the articles I could find that should not now be in Lotus. Peter coxhead (talk) 12:19, 6 February 2018 (UTC)