Disputatio:Glycyrrhiza glabra

Page contents not supported in other languages.
E Vicipaedia

Wouldn't it make more sense to cover this under the classical glycyrrhiza? Yes, you can argue that glycyrrhiza is the plant (or, if you must, the genus), liquiritia the root... but as this article is written, it's really about both. Why not just use the term that is actually used for both in the classical sources? --Iustinus 23:42, 7 Iunii 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pagina ab origine sub nomine Glycyrrhiza glabra scribebatur, Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:59, 8 Iunii 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not quite: Vuott capitalized the species epithet, contravening recommendation 60F of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature and the mos Vicipaedianus. (Where foliae as the plural of folium came from is anybody's guess.) IacobusAmor 10:19, 8 Iunii 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
subitoque mota est. Fortasse editor primus, Usor:Vuott, rationem suam dare vult, aut pro nomine primordiali, aut pro alio quodam. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 08:59, 8 Iunii 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Perhaps the existence of two forms of the word can serve a useful purpose here, and Glycyrrhiza glabra should be deployed for the plant, more or less as in Liquorice, with liquiritia deployed for the confection. Si sonos diligentissime auscultes, possis audire glycyrrhizam et liquiritiam esse vocabulum unum et idem. IacobusAmor 10:19, 8 Iunii 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ita, liquiritia in fontibus saec. IV et seq. legitur; ex "etymologia populari" (folk-etymology) verbi "glycyrrhizae" provenit.
Cum Iacobo consentio. Sicut in aliis Vicipaediis multis fit, pagina de planta ad Glycyrrhiza glabra removenda est. Quid dicitis, Iustine, Vuott? Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:40, 8 Iunii 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Licet per me, dummodo sit de ambabus rebus satis scriptum. I have no right to complain about stubs, but it seems to me somewhat counterintuitive to force the existence of to separate articles, when the information is skimpy enough to fit in one.
On the other hand, the use of absinthium for both the plant and the liquor has been a thorn in my side for a long time, as I've wanted to write about ancient wormwood liquors (cf. Conditum) --Iustinus 17:39, 8 Iunii 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nemine contradicente, id nunc feci. Liquiritia pro tempore est redirectio, sed possumus in paginam de bellariis convertere. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 18:13, 8 Iunii 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since there were no inbound links, I redirected glycyrrhiza to this page. I assume you'll eventually want to write glycyrrhiza about the genus, but most of those links refer to what is commonly called "liquorice," not the genus Glycyrrhiza. I assume therefore you'll want to change all of those links to Glycyrrhiza glabra. Obviously I disapprove of this, but since I'm apparently the minority view on this, all I can really do is grumble and/or whine. So... um >whine/grumble<. --Iustinus 21:15, 11 Iunii 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]