Talk:Hyacinthoides non-scripta

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hyacinthoides non-scripta article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Hyacinthoides non-scripta has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 9, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

Plants Mid‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biota of Great Britain and Ireland (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biota of Great Britain and Ireland, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Biota of Great Britain and IrelandWikipedia:WikiProject Biota of Great Britain and IrelandTemplate:WikiProject Biota of Great Britain and IrelandBiota of Great Britain and Ireland articles

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hyacinthoides non-scripta. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 04:04, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

implied absence over chalk

In the Description (not the Ecology) section the article implies absence over chalk: "This may explain the absence of H. non-scripta from thin soils over chalk in South East England, since the bulbs are unable to penetrate into sufficiently deep soils" I regard this as seriously misleading, as bluebells are common on the chalk hills of England, particularly in ancient woodland, and unlikely to all be over drift deposits. The cited text is a book, not available for immediate inspection, so I am amending the text slightly pending further research. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.3.255.103 (talk) 07:59, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hyacinthoides non-scripta. 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/20120323131916/http://www.kew.org/plants-fungi/Hyacinthoides-non-scripta.htm to http://www.kew.org/plants-fungi/Hyacinthoides-non-scripta.htm

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 19:46, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

British Isles, Britain and Ireland

@User:84.170.77.12 You have it exactly backwards. British Isles is the inclusive geographical term. Both Britain and Ireland are ambiguous overlapping political definitions and require disambiguation. Plantsurfer 19:47, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have it exactly backwards. “Great Britain” and “Ireland” are geographical references to two islands. “British Isles” is a political term. The last paragraph of the introduction on the page for the term “British Isles,” which you linked, explicitly recognises this fact: “In Ireland, the term “British Isles” is controversial, and there are objections to its usage. The Government of Ireland does not officially recognise the term, and its embassy in London discourages its use. “Britain and Ireland” is used as an alternative description, and “Atlantic Archipelago” has also seen limited use in academia.” 87.154.212.63 (talk) 14:30, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]