A fact from Calamintha sylvatica appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 May 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This redirect 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
@Plantdrew: is it that we need to do a history merge or can we just copy/paste with attribution? —Hyperik⌜talk⌟ 18:13, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Hyperik: copy/paste with attribution should be fine in this case. Both articles were created a few months ago. What gave me pause is the DYK. POWO has Calamintha sylvatica as a synonym of Clinopodium menthifolium subsp. menthifolium. Are there any other subspecies found in Britain outside of the Isle of Wight? Well, if Clinopodium menthifolium subsp. ascendens isn't recognized as separate species, C. menthifolium is certainly found elsewhere in Britain. I'd intended to see what Stace's New Flora of the British Isles has to say about the taxonomy and distribution of this. I have a copy in the office, but I haven't been in for more than 5 minutes at a time since March (before either article was created). @Peter coxhead: probably has a copy at hand though. Plantdrew (talk) 00:52, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Stace (4th edition) is ambivalent. He lists both Clinopodium menthifolium (1 site in the Isle of Wight) and C. ascendens (Donegal, Isle of Man, Co. Durham), but under the latter says "Perhaps better as C. menthifolium subsp. ascendens (Jord.) Govaerts". (The transferring author here shows which way PoWO will go!) I'd guess that if there's a 5th edition, they'll be listed as one species.
I think a 'copy/paste with attribution merge' is fine (remembering {{R with history}}, which I sometimes forget). There should, of course, be some discussion of the recognition of the subspp. as separate spp. historically and still by other sources. Peter coxhead (talk) 06:13, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As the creator of this article, I seem to have missed this merge proposal. I am happy for better taxonomists to deal with the matter as they wish. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:41, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Grazie! Should be done. Should the DYK banner stay here, or move there? —Hyperik⌜talk⌟ 14:25, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
