Talk:Amaranthaceae

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Taxonomy[edit]

This page is so utterly wrong from a taxonomic point of view. The taxobox stinks and it does not make up its mind what taxonomy is correct. GerardM 06:23, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

IPNI has only one family for the genus Salicornia; Chenopodiaceae. Now how can this be part of this family. It is wrong there is apparantly no valid literature that puts them with the Amaranthaceae. GerardM 06:29, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

In cases where the taxonomy is variable, it's not bad that the taxobox doesn't make up its mind. In this case, the family Chenopodiaceae is subsumed into the family Amaranthaceae in newer systems such as that by the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group, which is generally followed here (it's not named explicitly because at the time most pages were created, there was no one definitive source for the new concensus). Of course both systems should be mentioned, because as you point out Chenopodiaceae is still more common. Fair enough? Josh 06:51, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Merge discussion[edit]

Chenopodiaceae is paraphyletic and has been included in Amaranthaceae for a while now, including in the APG IV system. The "Chenopodiaceae" article should redirect to this page; the history of the name "Chenopodiaceae" can be discussed here (it already is partially). Tylototriton (talk) 12:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge - There are articles for deprecated taxa, but the Chenopodiaceae artcle is rather small, and the taxon mostly maps onto Amaranthaceae. Any differences can easily be included in a section on the taxonomic history. --Nessie (talk) 19:30, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. "Chenopodiaceae" is now a redirect. I didn't spot any information on that page that wasn't already included here. Did some cleanup but don't hesitate to improve. Tylototriton (talk) 09:34, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speak English![edit]

This obsession with using incomprqehensible Latin/Greek words is deliberately and actively harmful.
Whenever possible, the list should contain the normal English names first and foremost, and only then the Latin/Greek/Klingon/Inkhorn/Moonspeak names or whatever.
Because the whole point of Wikipedia is to offer information to non-experts!
— 89.1.58.254 (talk) 21:33, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]