This discussion of the definition of "bulb" is interesting. Sort of. The folks who work on the wiki had a long and very involved discussion about the precise definition of "bulb." For what it's worth, here's what I learned from that conversation: --It is impossible to create a precise and perfect definition for "bulb" for our context, because there will always be a number of plants that qualify in some ways but don't qualify in other ways. --Therefore, you have to use a definition that has some vagueness and flexibility to it. That's what we wrote for the wiki. --It's actually very good to be flexible in the wiki's definition, because when you're running a wiki your most important resource is the enthusiasm of the people contributing to it. If someone is excited enough to write up a genus or species, and it's on the borderline of being in-topic, you include it because you want to reward the contributors. That doesn't mean redwood trees get counted as bulbs, but Xanthorrhoea...well, OK. --By the way, Xanthorrhoea has been in the wiki for quite a while, and the world didn't end. --You don't have to worry about being forced to discuss something here just because it's in the wiki. The list and the wiki are two separate things. If people here don't want to discuss something, they won't discuss it. The conversation will adjust itself naturally. I know there's a natural human desire for precision, but running a wiki (or a discussion forum) is a lot more like playing jazz than playing orchestral music. Enjoy the tunes and don't worry about the sheet music. Mike PS: Paul, I am very jealous of your terrestrial orchids.