- As always, I encourage people to buy the books, which have a lot more details. - Dank (push to talk) 18:25, 12 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
- Omitted from Burkhardt's list: Aa in Orchidaceae. - Dank (push to talk) 00:14, 20 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
- Genus names that appear only in Quattrocchi are omitted from this list; they'll appear in a longer list. - Dank (push to talk) 14:01, 14 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
- These people, who don't currently have pages on any Wikipedia, have pages on Wikidata: Mary Elizabeth Catherine Gibbs, Syed Irtifaq Ali, Ali Al-Rawi, André M. Amorim, Antoine Petit (Q21522892), Charles Eugène Marie Van Bambeke, Paul Rodolphe Joseph Bamps, Jean-Baptiste-Grégoire Barbier, Diana Wentworth [Beaumont], Johann Georg Bill, Charles Robert (Bob) Gunn (1927–2015), Giuseppe Antonio Bonato, Federico Bonet Marco (also see List of Guggenheim Fellowships awarded in 1947), Francesco Borone, Albert William Borthwick (also see Botanical Society of Scotland), Samuel Boykin, Jacques de Briey, Jeremiah Bernard Brinton, Amelia Sophia Hume, Gabriele Brunelli, Alexander Caldcleugh (Q18526373), Philip D. Cantino, Charles Cavender Davis, William Carron, Johannes Casearius, Rafael Romero (Q21607379) [Rafael Romero Castañeda], Paulo Bezerra Cavalcante, Juan de Dios Vicente de la Cerda, Ho Tseng Chang, Kongkanda Chayamarit, Philibert Collet (Q21165229), Frederick Vavasour McConnell, Frederic Conyers Cotton, Gérard Henri Jean Cusset. - Dank (push to talk) 23:54, 26 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
- Unintuitive names: Bertya, Bronwenia, Chidlowia, Christianella, Connellia, Constantia. - Dank (push to talk) 18:51, 27 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
- For links to people who have bio pages here in the English Wikipedia, I tend to use the name and the spelling as it appears in the link, not in the listed source. - Dank (push to talk) 14:46, 4 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
- When a source mentions two different people who have been honored with identical genus names, I check to make sure the plant family is the right one for the connection I'm making between the genus name and the person honored. When there's only one person mentioned, I don't bother checking the family ... and for that reason among others, it may be that I've got the wrong genus, but that probably doesn't happen often, and it would be worse if I discarded any name where the families don't line up, because genetics has been upending genera and families for several decades ... even if a family assignment appears to be wrong, it's usually going to be the right genus anyway. - Dank (push to talk) 21:31, 5 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
- The approach to listing Quattrocchi references is more systematic in the second list than in this one. - Dank (push to talk) 12:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)Reply
- Now 845 rows. - Dank (push to talk) 04:35, 2 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
- The image posted with the caption Bauhinia variegata is actually an image of Ceiba sp. (as also mentioned in the English description of the photo). The name in the file title is not what is depicted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by S.v.Mering (talk • contribs) 19:59, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
- New data paper published today that might of interest: "Creating a multi-linked dynamic dataset: a case study of plant genera named for women." (https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.11.e114408), see also this guest blog post (https://blog.pensoft.net/2023/12/06/entangled-herstories-how-to-create-an-open-multi-linked-dynamic-dataset-of-plant-genera-named-for-women/). - S.v.Mering (talk) 21:06, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
- Nice work, all of you, and I'm happy to see that you're working closely with Wikidata. You've probably noticed this already, but just above, I mention the names that were in my sources and also present on Wikidata but not (at that time) on the English Wikipedia. - Dank (push to talk) 21:15, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply
In this edit, I removed (for each name that was redlinked) a link to the last section of the Wikidata page for that person. This section of Wikidata gives you links to relevant pages on other-language-versions of Wikipedia and on Wikispecies, Wikisource and Commons. There's a lot of information on some of these people that could be very useful for editors who want to create articles and lists here on the English Wikipedia. - Dank (push to talk) 15:41, 3 May 2021 (UTC)Reply
I've just added a second source, by Burkhardt ... if anyone is interested in taking info from it for these lists or for other articles, and if you'd like help with the German, I'll be happy to translate (if you tell me which entries you want translated). - Dank (push to talk) 03:27, 28 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Hi Dank, apologies for the late delay in replying to you. I would be interested in using the new reference for this article and other articles as and when it is needed. I think the best way to use the source, is to work out which entries are NEW (to the list) and add then them systematically from A-C onwards. I would be happy to add them to the list. If you could translate, as my German is terrible. I used to know the numbers and greetings but even that has faded!! DavidAnstiss (talk) 10:52, 30 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Fantastic, thanks. We're looking for genera mentioned in Burkhardt's new entries that are accepted (i.e. not synonyms) at https://powo.science.kew.org (POWO). So, for instance, in Burkhardt's new entry for A. D. Elmer (this name appears in her 2018 edition also), she lists 8 associated genus names, including Adelmeria and Elmera ... and these two genera were the only ones I found that were accepted at POWO last year ... it's not guaranteed that they're still the only two accepted ones, but it's likely, and I don't plan to recheck POWO for the people that I already have listed. So I don't plan to add anything for Elmer. But if you can generate a list of namesakes that are listed in her new work but not in the previous work, and then find out which (if any) of those genus names are accepted at POWO, that would be a huge help ... I'll be happy to add the new rows and translate from the German. - Dank (push to talk) 13:54, 30 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Thanks David, good work. There's a trick that might help: go to POWO, search on anything so that you get a list of search results, then blank the search and they'll say you get some ungodly number of results. Then click on the
click on the "Genera" and "Accepted names" buttons at the top ... that will reduce the number of hits to about 13,900 ... then click on the "list" symbol in the right upper right corner so that it displays a list only (no pictures), then click on "480 results per page" (lower left corner). That should give you 30 pages of hits. Block and copy each page into a single text file, and you've got a searchable list of accepted genera. (Around 1% of the hits will be for spore-bearing rather than seed-bearing plants ... we'll get rid of those entries later.) - Dank (push to talk) 15:10, 31 January 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Finally, after a year of working on it. Got to the end of PDF source. Got waylaid a bit by adding details to various fungi and algae articles. But that was sort of fun and nice to add a lot of facts to a lot of plant articles. Also re-established a few genera that were also re-directs. Pushed my wiki 'contributions' number - well high. Now close to 30,000 edits ! DavidAnstiss (talk) 00:04, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
- Fantastic ... it was a pleasure watching you work, and it's great to see this being kept up-to-date. - Dank (push to talk) 00:17, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply
.jpg){kind=link}
