Talk:Shrub

Definition problem

The height definition as <6m is seems problematic. First, this figure is not actually given in the reference cited. Lawrence and Hawthorne (2006) say, "There is no agreement about their definitions; gardeners may refer to a shrub as a low (say < 5m) and many-stemmed plant; but this is the definition others prefer to reserve for bush.", but do not give a firm definition, they only say what gardeners might say. Also, the text seem to mostly talk about shrubs in an African context, so perhaps this was never intended to be applied to a wider context. Florabase WA (florabase.dpaw.wa.gov.au/help/glossary#S), "a woody plant usually less than 5 m high". Encyclopaedia Britannica says, "usually less than 3 m", plus "treelike shrubs, from 3 to 6 m tall". The NY Botanical Gardens (sweetgum.nybg.org/science/glossary) has "A woody plant that is branched at the base or unbranched but less than 2 meters tall. The difference between unbranched shrubs and treelets is sometimes unclear. Compare with treelet and tree." So they do not put a height limit on shrubs branched from the base. I suggest this point be better researched and a suitable citation given.

Untitled

This article is about explaining what a shrub is. There are so many, that it is not a good idea to create a list with all shrubs. In my opinion it is better to have a few obvious shrubs with a page and a picture. GerardM 10:05, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Handy for accessing pages with shrubs on, though. There's long been a similar list at Tree. Particularly useful (by clicking on 'related changes') for seeing what new edits have appeared. Maybe the list could be put on a page of its own eventually, but at the moment it doesn't warrant it in terms of page size. - MPF 01:46, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

So, this is the source of inspiration for {{substub}}. I would never have guessed that the madcap nomenclature of playful horticulturalists would infect Wikipedia with such silliness. (Although it would not surprise me to learn that subshrub is just the work of bored trolls.) --Yath 23:35, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

---

The inclusion of Thymus among shrubs seems quirky. A complete list will be very long indeed, more suitable for a horticultural dictionary, of which there are already several. Too bad Gerard M's advice can't be followed... Wetman 10:27, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Molly Ivins' Shrub

Where would I go to find an article on the Molly Ivins book? Wiwaxia 05:03, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that some editing of the shrub list needs to be done. I am not in any way an expert, but I know that Aloe is not a woody plant, and is actually a succulent. Digsdirt 18:06, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Hm. I may have arrived just a bit late, but from personal extensive experience I can assure you that among the hundreds of species of Aloes, all of them more or less succulent, several species are semi-woody and some are decidedly shrubby. Examples include A. dichotoma and A. Bainesii, both of which might better be classed as trees, but also A. plicatilis and A. arborescens, that one could hardly complain about their being classified as shrubs. You might find it helpful to regard them in the same light as, for example, cacti, Crassula and Euphorbia, of which some species also may be regarded realistically as succulent trees and shrubs. JonRichfield (talk) 08:23, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Shrub in Internet slang

Please note that this article is on the subject of botany, not philology. WP has no objection to articles on philology as such, but it is desirable to maintain coherence within an article. If "shrub" also occurs in netspeak, no problem, but then put any discussion on the subject in the article Internet slang. It then might be reasonable if you desire, to put an entry into a disambiguation article for "Shrub (disambiguation)" or a redirection for Shrub (netspeak) or the like, to ensure that anyone trying to find the information could find it easily. In this case it might be sufficient, if you think it worth the entry, to add a hatnote to this article along the lines of "This article deals with the botanical term; for the netspeak article, see Internet slang. JonRichfield (talk) 08:13, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

A shrub is usually just another word for a bush. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.17.38.155 (talk) 23:01, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Possible copyright violation

This article has an extensive list of shrubs I think may have been taken from a book or journal which is why I tagged it. Rissa, Guild of Copy Editors (talk) 04:12, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

The list doesn't make enough sense to be a copyvio. Several entries are Not shrubs. And it is by no means a complete list of shrubs (and if it's not complete, what's the criteria for inclusion)? No copyvio, just a crowd sourced pile of random links. Plantdrew (talk) 05:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

or bush, but this is more of a gardening term

Language seems odd for the lead. Maybe just say "or bush" or perhaps address this somewhere else in the article?