Template talk:PWO

why not follow their guidelines?

Why has this citation been made up rather than follow what their advise? [1]https://powo.science.kew.org/cite-us Especially "PWO" is not something I have ever seen being used; the URL is clearly https://powo.science.kew.org/ Can this be amended? Weepingraf (talk) 13:23, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

PS. I see there is a correct one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cite_POWO perhaps they should be merged in some way. Weepingraf (talk) 13:26, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

There is also {{PWOb}}. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:13, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Not sure the name of the template is important, as long as the citation is correct. At the moment POWO redirects to PWO, perhaps this can be reversed if it pleases the majority. Out of force of habit and mass copy and paste, I tend to use PWO. Andyboorman (talk) 11:50, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Ditto to Andy, though whether we even need it at all with the POWO link also being in the {Taxonbar} template?? - MPF (talk) 21:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

For clarity, {{PWO|2018|March|17}} renders as:

• Govaerts, R. et al. 2018. Xylomelum in Kew Science Plants of the World Online. The Board of Trustees of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Published online. Accessed: 2018 March 17. Reference page. 

and {{PWOb|33015-1|2018|March|17|Xylomelum}} as:

• Govaerts, R. et al. 2018. Xylomelum in Kew Science Plants of the World online. The Board of Trustees of the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Published online. Accessed: 17 March 2018.

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC)