Talk:Prunus cerasoides

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Prunus cerasoides is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to plants and botany. For more information, visit the project page.
???	This article has not yet received a quality rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

[edit] Request for refs

I added the tag on citations because it is my opinion that statements indicating the plant improves digestion and stimulates respiration should cite specific sources for people who wish to use the plant for that purpose.

The tag adder did not sign, but I think he was justified. Also the article lacks all the usual refs to the GRIN and other databases.Dave 20:25, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

As to whether we should write an article the reader can use for medical purposes, DEFINITELY NOT!!!! In fact there should be a disclaimer in there if we are going the medical route. You can say, this was an ancient remedy, or this was a folk medicine, but leave it up to the professional medical people, doctors and druggists, to prescribe. We are not quacks. If I see anyone trying to be one I sure will bring it up to the top level administrators here fast. We don't use encyclopedias to treat ourselves or encourage others to do so. The sick and unhealthy are entitled to medical care in this country, not Wikipedia quackery.Dave 20:25, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] On cleanup ...

Whoever cleans it up adding the refs (it might be me, maybe not) should be aware that GRIN now portrays this as a variety. GRIN says:

"Prunus cerasoides var. campanulata (1 accessions)
Prunus cerasoides var. cerasoides (1 accessions)"

We also have Prunus campanulata (on which I am working). Since we already have these as species not varieties I made an impromptu decision not to move them but to give the correct GRIN specification in the article. You can see what I did when I dump campanulata into Wikipedia (not quite yet). You botanical savants, feel free to change it. It was a tough decision and maybe the plant committee should be making it. I figured the traditionalists might like to see it under its old name and be informed there of the change.Dave 20:25, 26 August 2007 (UTC)