Talk:County flowers of the United Kingdom

This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Plants Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United Kingdom This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article is a former featured list candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. Once the objections have been addressed you may resubmit the article for featured list status.

Yorkshire as a Harebell? White Rose, surely? http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/gb-en-ys.html (Flag web site, both images of the Yorkshire flag display a Yorkshire rose) http://www.civicheraldry.co.uk/wriding_ob.html (Civil Heraldry Web Site, describing Yorkshire's coat of arms, "The white roses are a symbol of Yorkshire, ultimately derived from the badge of the House of York. The three roses on the red chief represent the three Ridings or "thirdings" into which Yorshire was devided. The other rose is shown en Soleil, a device adopted by the Yorkist King Edward IV, when he reached the throne after the Battle of Towton.") http://www.yorkshire-ridings.org.uk/yorkshireday.htm (Yorkshire Ridings Society, "Remember, wearing Yorkshire's white rose on August 1st shows you care about the traditional culture and heritage of our county.") http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Rose_of_York (Wikipedia article, "The White Rose of York (Rosa alba) is the symbol of the House of York and latterly of Yorkshire.")

Anyone with me? Scribblin' Simon 19:31, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page is modelled on the U.S. state flowers page. SP-KP 22:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following county flowers are missing a photo:

It isn't made clear anywhere in this article, plus there are references to cities such as "Newcastle", which are clearly not counties. Either these are actually meaning metropolitan counties (i.e. Tyne and Wear for Newcastle, but calling it "Newcastle" excludes lots of other major settlementsd, not least Sunderland!) or the wording of their survey is wrong. Moreover, it is clearly not just a list of non-metropolitan and metropolitan counties as Cumberland and Westmorland are mentioned. I'll clarify the text to show the ambiguity over the term "county". Logoistic 09:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What about the traditional county flowers, such as the Essex cowslip, or the Yorkshire roses? Why does Plantlife get a free ticket to the "County Flowers of the UK" article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.23.101.234 (talk) 16:21, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Isle of Man is not a county, nor is it in the United Kingdom. DuncanHill (talk) 15:08, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quite so. (Not the issue here, but there's a similar problem when nationalist editors change "British Isles" to "Britain and Ireland". The Isle of Man is not part of Britain or the United Kingdom.) Peter coxhead (talk) 16:51, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on County flowers of the United Kingdom. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://new.edp24.co.uk/search/story.aspx?brand=EDPOnline&category=News&itemid=NOED04%20May%202004%2023%3A14%3A59%3A520&tBrand=EDPOnline&tCategory=search
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150430170312/http://www.plantlife.org.uk/wild_plants/county_flowers/ to http://www.plantlife.org.uk/wild_plants/county_flowers/

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) 19:32, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on County flowers of the United Kingdom. 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/20070510212828/http://www.gov.im/isleofman/facts.xml to http://www.gov.im/isleofman/facts.xml

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) 17:44, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why are all the common names capitalized, when only a few should be?

nunmap (edit this page to talk) 12:04, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nunmap: they are in sentence case, rather than being fully capitalized, which seems reasonable to me, as they start separate cells of the table. If more than one name were given, as it could be for, say, Cardamine pratensis, you might expect "Cuckooflower, lady's smock". Peter coxhead (talk) 18:45, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter coxhead: that does seem reasonable, but it's arguably less useful. If someone wanted to know the correct spelling they wouldn't be able to tell from the table alone. Would you mind if I change them? nunmap (edit this page to talk) 19:23, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm indifferent, but the entries in the last column should be consistent. Peter coxhead (talk) 19:55, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Peter coxhead: I didn't get notified, but I've done that now. nunmap (edit this page to talk) 01:01, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The cell colours recently added with this edit make the text impossible to read for some taxa, and are wholly unexplained. @Nunmap: please address both issues. I would suggest an additional column for 'shared' or something similar, and simply colour only that cell. Either way, these need to be much subtler for those who don't have 20/20 vision. Thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:14, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Moyes - I totally agree. I hadn't seen this coloured version, but it is quite unnecessary. A simple asterisk in the county column could just as easily have indicated that this was also valid for another county. Even an asterisk and text such as *(Also Cambridgeshire) would have sufficed. The purple is particularly bad and might well be unusable with readers with colour vision impairment. Can't we go back to the uncoloured version please?  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   20:46, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should - at least start from there. I do like the principle of using colour to help me see which plant is shared with which other county(s), but I'm sure that ought to be achievable in a less disruptive manner, and in a dedicated cell, not across a complete row. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:55, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nick Moyes: @Velella: Done. nunmap (edit this page to talk) 01:05, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I've made each table sortable, too. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:20, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The sorting capability,when applied to Common name, achieves much the same result as colouring did. It is now very easy to see if a flower represents more than one County.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   11:11, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Velella: it never ceases to amaze me that very few people see the value in creating lists in a sortable format. That's the marvel of online over printed lists, yet so many editors create separate tables (as here) or have made list articles of species without using any form of table at all. Such a wasted opportunity, in my view. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:28, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]