Talk:Titan arum

Titan arum has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 31, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Plants High‑importance

	Plants portal 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	It is requested that a range map be included in this article to improve its quality.

Indonesia High‑importance

	Indonesia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics 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.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

Photo arrangement.

Greetings: I would appreciate it if photos could be arranged that illustrate each stage of the plant's life cycle in order. I find the text descriptions vague. Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 08:25, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, and see the 'Gallery cleanup' item above. There are too many images and they say too little. I'll have a go at explaining the sequence in text and images; a diagram would help. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:43, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I've selected and cleaned up images to create a life-cycle diagram, have removed the gallery which has been flagged since 2022, and have arranged the remaining 4 images in order. I hope this makes things clearer. Now to rewrite the text... Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiswick Chap - Thank you so much! I found a live stream from the Royal Botanical Garden Sydney [Australia] as their plant is on the verge of blooming and it was hard to understand the relationship between the slender plant (a compound leaf, it seems) and the hefty flower. I appreciate your work. You are an asset to Wikipedia. Wordreader (talk) 17:05, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's very kind of you. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:09, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OOOPS! Apparently it's "Royal Botanic Garden, Sydney". Sorry, Australia! Wordreader (talk) 17:20, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. Pbritti (talk) 15:25, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Titan arum/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 17:04, 25 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Pbritti (talk · contribs) 21:39, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, it's Pbritti! You've done a couple reviews for me lately, so I would love to extend the favor back to you. I may or may not be able to knock my review out in a single punch, so my apologies if this takes a day or two. You can always reach me via ping here of on my talk page! ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:39, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! Chiswick Chap (talk) 01:40, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My initial appraisal of the changes suggests all suggestions were adequately addressed. Will finish review with a spot-check and complete re-read. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:33, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Preliminary review

Read this article before taking up this review and was more than impressed. The lifecycle diagram is a remarkable contribution to this article, something that really improves this beyond some of the more "generic" species that get to GA (not to knock my own work). In any case, what follows is a breakdown of the various sections and any issues that I saw in reading them. This is separate from my checks on the sources, which will come tomorrow (probably, I hope).

Glad you like the diagram!

Infobox

A map of the plant's native range would be appreciated. If the range perfectly corresponds with the island of Sumatra, perhaps a map of the island's location would be a good addition to the body of the article.

Endemic to Sumatra doesn't mean it's in every corner of the island. A map would therefore be a more subtle affair than just colouring the island red.

Lead

I like the general format of the lead, but I think it needs to be expanded. Mention of the coverage received by blooms in cultivation (presuming that a source makes adequate mention of this) would be nice, as would any description of the plant's other cultural impact.

Added.

Etymology

Looks good. No concerns.

Life-cycle

I'll get back to this.

Ok, here we go. The below are not substantial concerns but instead suggestions:

Food from the leaf accumulates Perhaps indicate what "food" here means.
- Glossed.
The odor is detectable up to a half mile Presuming that this refers to the distance from which it is detectable by people.
- Yes, I assume so, it is a non-scientific claim.

Taxonomy

This species was originally assigned to a different genera. Any sort of description of this reassessment would be appreciated. I think we could also benefit from any evolutionary material that may be available on this particular peculiarity.

Described with original (obscure!) primary sources. I've added a mention of the genus and its distribution to indicate the evolution of the group.

Spot-check

The following is a citation spot-check:

3: Good to go.
5: All content sourced to this looks to be verified.
11: Verifies the content it's cited to.
13: This citation could be expanded to feature the author name but looks good despite saying "blog".
18: Rad source. Love seeing something like this open-access. Verifies the relevant content.
31: A plant has flowered every second year (2012 to 2022) in the Copenhagen Botanical Garden. I'm not entirely certain that the citation adequately sources this content. Regardless, the dates of publication and access are errant.
38: AGF, but looks reliable.

Not bad. Just one concern, but this seems minor enough not to merit further investigation. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:50, 30 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noted. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:56, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.