Contents

Talk:Miscanthus sinensis

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

Plants Mid‑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 articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge[edit]

Merge is fine by me, though I'm surprised more information hasn't been posted in this article, as zebra grass is a common horticultural fixture in the US. Severnjc 21:26, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Uh yeah. Why are there 2 articles on the same plant? --SB_Johnny|^talk|_books 02:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Miscanthus sinensis. 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/20060901224740/http://www.ext.vt.edu/departments/envirohort/factsheets/groundcovers/zebragr.htmltohttp://www.ext.vt.edu/departments/envirohort/factsheets/groundcovers/zebragr.html

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) 02:49, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi@Darorcilmir: I don't agree with the edit summary of this edit: Removed unsourced and dubious names. I have no opinion what the correct names are but there were citations, which you removed. Invasive Spices (talk) 21:57, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I removed a name with a source printed in Korean. I'm assuming this was an English translation of a Korean name, rather than a common name used by English speaking people? Correct me if I'm wrong. I trawled through all the major online references, and could not find this name anywhere, The overwhelming preference was for "eulalia" or "Chinese silver grass".

I'm sure this name would be relevant in the Korean Wikipedia, but I don't see how relevant it is in the English version. Regards, Darorcilmir (talk) 16:24, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah I think one is just the transliteration (putting Korean pronunciation into English letters) and the other is their preferred translation. Since it's from Korea, they are the authority about this grass in a lot of ways, but not necessarily in English. Invasive Spices (talk) 20:56, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]