Talk:Magnolia × alba

Regarding some recent edits...

Dear Hamamelis, this is in regards to the changes in the Magnolia × alba article by you. I presented in a way which I believed was neutral and correct as possible but you reworded them.

Making a claim on common name based on GRIN's information may not the best thing to do because I don't think we should count GRIN as an authority on language. That is not to say 'white champaca' isn't used at all. But I'm saying, laymen often, including myself, often refer to this as "Michelia alba" as if it were a common name. This name is widespread in the nursery trade (usage on plant ID tags) and is prevalent on plant enthusiast forums. And many actually still hold onto this incorrect usage knowing just that. Now for the English speakers in Asia (like Singapore) and Hawaii, they may use other names. Some may be based on Chinese such as Pak Lan. Hence why I did not mention "common" in the same sentence as names because it doesn't give a NPOV.

On the Magnolia Society's website, the authority includes Noot (Nooteboom). Figlar is part of the society as well. Would the Magnolia Society's website count as a reliable source?

Another thing, I did not include "not found in the wild" because one of Nooteboom's writings mentions he found natural groves of M. champaca and M. montana (IIRC) crosses somewhere in Thailand. Whether they show the same exact features as the cross that is cultivated, I don't know. The one in cultivation is known to be mostly sterile (some purported instances of it producing seed though) --Dara (talk) 18:01, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello Dara, I don't have time right now to reply in depth (going to work), but please do edit over what I've done as you see fit to do so. I do think GRIN and IPNI are more reliable when it comes to naming authorities (Tropicos.org and Kew also agreed with them, both are usually quite reliable). I am but a lay botanist, and you should consult with the professionally employed botanists (and yes other lay botanists) at Talk:WikiProject Plants. User:Wikiklaas, in particular, seems to know a lot about all things Magnoliaceae. Thanks for posting here first. All the best, Hamamelis (talk) 22:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi, I updated "WikiProject Plants" (above) by linking it to its talk page. That is more specifically where questions of this matter should be directed. If you take a look at it you'll see many questions asked and answered, with opinions coming down on various sides of things. It is very active, and you're likely to get more than one response. Thanks, Hamamelis (talk) 07:00, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Other synonyms

According to this link: <http://www.csvh.org/sp/show_species_details.php?record_id=96254>

• Michelia champaca L. (considered the same species as M. champaca here?)
• Michelia longifolia var. Blume, var. racemosa Blume Blume (as varieties)
• Sampacca longifolia (Blume) Kuntze (It's not treated as a cross here)

Some laymen write it out like Michelia champaca var. Alba or as a cultivar, Michelia champaca 'Alba'. But I'm not sure if these were ever recognized names. There could be others out there I suspect... --Dara (talk) 18:25, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Magnolia × alba. 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/20110709171836/http://www.magnoliasociety.org/classification_docs/classifications.html to http://www.magnoliasociety.org/classification_docs/classifications.html

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) 19:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)