Talk:List of Pinus species

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Plants Mid‑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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Info about the topic.....[edit]

http://scholar.google.com.hk/scholar?as_q=Pinus+classification&num=10&btnG=Search+Scholar&as_epq=&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=&as_publication=&as_ylo=&as_yhi=&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdts=5&hl=en

--58.38.42.112 (talk) 08:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://scholar.google.com.hk/scholar?hl=en&q=allintitle%3A+Pinus+taxonomy&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

--58.38.42.112 (talk) 08:15, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

http://scholar.google.com.hk/scholar?hl=en&q=allintitle%3A+Pinus+taxonomical&btnG=Search&as_sdt=2000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0

People who are interested nomenclature topic, the scholar info can be obtained in the same way --58.38.42.112 (talk) 08:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction is badly out of date[edit]

The introduction is badly out of date, as Pinus has not been divided into three subgenera for a long time. Nobody even uses the term Ducampopinus any more - cladistics and molecular studies since the early 2000s demonstrated this group is artificial and has since become redundant (for example P. krempfii was shown to be contained within Strobus around 15 years ago). Tellingly, no citations seem to have been added since 2010, when this article was tagged as in need of attention. I'm going to go ahead and make a properly referenced introduction to this, and remove mention of the outdated ideas here.

The selection of Pinus species listed here is excellent though!

Atshal (talk) 20:03, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Linking style[edit]

I wish it weren't such a chore to do so, but it would make more sense to link the "real" name of these species rather than the common names. The binomial is more likely to the actual article title (as I found at Pinus strobus / Eastern White Pine. Plus all these common names need to be decapped... so much work... Huw Powell (talk) 01:10, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pinus maestrensi and "?"[edit]

The "?" on P. latteri is due to the uncertain nature on if its placement within Pinus Sect. Pinea, subsect. Pinaster, and thus should not be removed. Regarding Pinus maestrensis, per both the International plant names index and The gymnosperm database this taxon is currently treated as a subspecies (at best) of Pinus cubensis, which is why its not in the list.--Kev min § 19:38, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying. Heh0002 (talk) 20:08, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]