Talk:Tree (plant): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Nancy Sculerati MD No edit summary |
imported>Pat Palmer m (Pat Palmer moved page Talk:Tree to Talk:Tree (plant) without leaving a redirect) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | |||
I think we should de-emphasise the "champion trees" and major tree genera. They might make decent article on their own, they might even be ok further down the page, but I don't think that they should have the sort of precidence they have now. Thoughts? [[User:Ian Ramjohn|Ian Ramjohn]] 12:38, 23 January 2007 (CST) | I think we should de-emphasise the "champion trees" and major tree genera. They might make decent article on their own, they might even be ok further down the page, but I don't think that they should have the sort of precidence they have now. Thoughts? [[User:Ian Ramjohn|Ian Ramjohn]] 12:38, 23 January 2007 (CST) | ||
Go ahead, and we'll see. Sounds right. [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 13:06, 23 January 2007 (CST) | Go ahead, and we'll see. Sounds right. [[User:Nancy Sculerati MD|Nancy Sculerati MD]] 13:06, 23 January 2007 (CST) | ||
Latest revision as of 12:20, 22 September 2020
I think we should de-emphasise the "champion trees" and major tree genera. They might make decent article on their own, they might even be ok further down the page, but I don't think that they should have the sort of precidence they have now. Thoughts? Ian Ramjohn 12:38, 23 January 2007 (CST)
Go ahead, and we'll see. Sounds right. Nancy Sculerati MD 13:06, 23 January 2007 (CST)