Talk:Ranunculus

Identify Species (Photo)

Ranunculus bush

Does anybody knows what species of Ranunculus is this ? (I'm not sure whether it is repens or other) I also have pictures of a species similar to this one in the picture, just that it has white flowers and six larger petals. bogdan ʤjuʃkə | ^Talk 21:26, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Actually, it's an "Anemone false ranunculus" (Anemone ranunculoides) bogdan ʤjuʃkə | ^Talk 21:46, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Bur Buttercup

I suggest this entry be deleted from the Ranunculus page. When following this link to Ranunculus testiculatus, it is redirected to Caratocephala testiculata, suggesting that it is incorrectly classified as a species of the Ranunculus genus.

Done --Melburnian (talk) 07:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Dead head old blooms?

does anyone know if one should "dead head" the old blooms of the ranunculus —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.46.235.211 (talk) 12:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Buttercup also a name for Narcissus

Searching for "buttercup" led me here, but I could not find the buttercup I was seeking (it was not on the Buttercup disambiguation page either). I was looking for Narcissus and I finally found it. Posting it here so that maybe it will help others find the flower quicker. (Buttercup is what I heard the Narcissus flowers called by everyone I knew, for my whole life!) Thanks. Fallendarling (talk) 17:18, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

If you can find reliable and quotable evidence that Narcissus is widely called Buttercup in some parts of the world, then am appropriate comment can be added. This is not the case in Britain where Narcissus is exclusively called Daffodil.  Velela  ^{Velela Talk}   20:53, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Wrong species in picture attached to article

There is a picture attached to this article named "Buttercups in park in Louisiana", which looks more like flowers of some plant part of the lily family (Liliacee) on the 6-petal flowers and long leaves. This picture should be checked and removed if not actually showing a legitimately Ranunculus species. This is the link for reference: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Buttercups_at_Academy_Park%2C_Minden%2C_LA_IMG_7067.JPG/240px-Buttercups_at_Academy_Park%2C_Minden%2C_LA_IMG_7067.JPG — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.239.103.133 (talk) 13:36, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the image is actually a Hemerocallis cultivar.Dwergenpaartje (talk) 10:25, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Errors/confusion in first sentence in Description

The Description section starts with "Buttercups are mostly perennial, but occasionally annual or biennial, herbaceous, aquatic or terrestral plants, often with leafs in a rosette at the base of the stem."

The title subject of this article is Ranunculus. While this includes buttercups and while "buttercups" directs to this article, it seems inappropriate and needlessly confusing to start the Description section using the name Buttercups instead of Ranunculus. For example, it raises the question of whether or not the statement applies to other non-buttercup members of the Ranunculus genus.

Next, the structure of the sentence implies that perennial, annual, biennial, herbaceous, aquatic, terrestrial are alternatives because they are all listed one after the other in the same sentence. It should be split into at least 3 sentences:

Most Ranunculuses are perennials but some varieties are annuals or biennials. Most are terrestrial (note spelling error in article) but some are aquatic. All Ranunculuses are herbaceous. They often have leaves (note spelling error in article here and elsewhere: "leafs") in a rosette at the base of the stem. 47.214.177.17 (talk) 17:06, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Agree. Moreover, I was disappointed that Buttercup redirects here. While this is an OK article for biologists, for the ordinary person wondering what that "buttercup" in his lawn may be, it is virtually useless. A good Buttercup article listing common & significant species would be very helpful—many other common plant names have their own articles. Unfortunately, I'm not the guy to write it. Any takers? --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 10:51, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Most Wikipedia plant articles are now listed under Latin names (the exceptions being trees and food species). I agree it’s hard to find the common species, so have added a para in the lead section. Not ideal, I know. Darorcilmir (talk) 13:42, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ranunculus. 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/20170525105020/http://www.forest.go.kr/kna/special/download/English_Names_for_Korean_Native_Plants.pdf to http://www.forest.go.kr/kna/special/download/English_Names_for_Korean_Native_Plants.pdf

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) 04:33, 12 December 2017 (UTC)