Comment It is an image which was made in the spirit of the illustrated botanical boards of the XIX books: there is a bouquet of 3 branches which brings together the characteristics of the plant. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:17, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We see leaves, flowers and fruit, no trunk or branches. Don't you think this needs specification? I couldn't support this in the scope of the whole tree. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:57, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The elements that are shown are those of the distinctive characters that the naturalist can put in the herbaria. For a whole tree we give the name followed by Habit. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:44, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I thought the habit showed the surroundings, not just the plant. That's what I've seen in all photos of smaller plants that are nominated here as habit or habitus. I don't think I can accept a technical definition of "tree" that doesn't show what everyone else thinks of as a tree. I almost always defer to you on matters of botany, but I think it's important to Oppose this time, in order to serve the non-specialist who's searching for a scope that actually shows a tree. A tree has a trunk. This is not a tree. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:23, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I misspoke: the term habit cannot be applied here because it implies seeing the environment, hence the reduced scope, that I have placed. If I have not put this image in competition before, it is because I have not found a better scope ...--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:17, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
