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
The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.
At first glance, there's a ton of false positives in your count. At least 20,000 of those pages don't refer to "Rock's Peony" but the cultivar "Peony 'Joseph Rock'". Without the quotes, you're also getting pages that mention both rocks and peonies that aren't meaning to refer to this species.
Rkitko(
talk)04:25, 29 December 2008 (UTC)reply
(edit conflict) Badagnani, You're getting those skewed results because you didn't put Rock's Peony in quotes. Drill down and you'll see 'rock garden' and 'peony' as a typical result with your search. With the quotes, it goes back to Rkitko's numbers. Further, Google Books gives 26 results for "Paeonia rockii" and only 2 for "Rock's peony". Google Scholar is at a truly overwhelming 271 to 2. That's why I moved it in the first place. I don't think there's even a question in this case.
First Light (
talk)
04:28, 29 December 2008 (UTC)reply
Support the move to Paeonia rockii; we have a long-standing convention of using scientific names for plants, based on the fact that vernacular names are notoriously imprecise. In addition, Google hits is a very poor tool for determining the most widely used name. I see no convincing reason to depart from the norm for plant articles.
Guettarda (
talk)
06:27, 29 December 2008 (UTC)reply
Support. I checked the page, wondering what is a Rock's Peony and I see it is a tree peony. Tree peony is the vernacular name I know. --
Una Smith (
talk)
06:32, 29 December 2008 (UTC)reply
I noticed that, too. It seems that "tree peony" was attached to Paeonia suffruticosa and when the taxonomic realignment occurred, Paeonia rockii carried that vernacular name along with it when it was elevated from subspecies level, making it all the more difficult to locate a common "common name" that's precise, not ambiguous, and is used frequently. --
Rkitko(
talk)16:39, 29 December 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks, I think I'm beginning to understand. Paeonia rockii is correct, and "Paeonia suffruticosa subsp. rockii" is a synonym? I'll also add a note about Paeonia rockii being one of several species referred to as 'tree peony'. Yet another reason for sticking with scientific names.
First Light (
talk)
19:18, 29 December 2008 (UTC)reply
Comment Use of raw Google (that is www.google.com) is discouraged by
WP:Search engines; one reason for this is that Paeonia rockii occurs in languages other than English, for which Rkitko has forgotten to correct; most of his results are false positives.
SeptentrionalisPMAnderson04:13, 31 December 2008 (UTC)reply
Ok, then, I'll play the game. Here are the language-adjusted counts: "Paeonia rockii" -wikipedia in English G-hits (
3240); "Rock's peony" -wikipedia in English G-hits (
308). Still looks like Paeonia rockii is more commonly used. --
Rkitko(
talk)04:37, 31 December 2008 (UTC)reply
Another Comment Using reliable sources is preferable anyway. Using Google Books, it gives 26 results for "Paeonia rockii" and only 2 for "Rock's Peony". Only 2 of the 26 are non-English, so that still makes "Paeonia rockii" the preferred choice of over 90% of reliable sources, or 24 to 2.
First Light (
talk)
04:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC)reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.