Talk:Herbal medicine: Difference between revisions
Jrtayloriv (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
→Article needed on "List of Medicinal Herbs": new section |
||
Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
Why is there two pages of articles for [[Hygrophila spinosa]] on the internet? When I click on your link above I am given a different wiki version then the one I am seeing from a Bing Search here in Ohio with the keyword "Hygrophila spinosa". Some weird games are going on and I suspect the government may be behind it. Even the talk pages were different. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygrophila_auriculata What is weird I compared the two links from both versions of the page and the link is the same. Is this some kind of phishing going on? Am I being directed to alternate wikiversions depending on where I enter them from the internet? Is this being done through poisoning of my DNS Cache? [[Special:Contributions/108.81.134.236|108.81.134.236]] ([[User talk:108.81.134.236|talk]]) 02:50, 2 March 2012 (UTC) |
Why is there two pages of articles for [[Hygrophila spinosa]] on the internet? When I click on your link above I am given a different wiki version then the one I am seeing from a Bing Search here in Ohio with the keyword "Hygrophila spinosa". Some weird games are going on and I suspect the government may be behind it. Even the talk pages were different. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygrophila_auriculata What is weird I compared the two links from both versions of the page and the link is the same. Is this some kind of phishing going on? Am I being directed to alternate wikiversions depending on where I enter them from the internet? Is this being done through poisoning of my DNS Cache? [[Special:Contributions/108.81.134.236|108.81.134.236]] ([[User talk:108.81.134.236|talk]]) 02:50, 2 March 2012 (UTC) |
||
:Please double check and post detailed information to [[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)]]. -- 18:21, 2 March 2012 (UTC) |
:Please double check and post detailed information to [[Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)]]. -- 18:21, 2 March 2012 (UTC) |
||
== Article needed on "List of Medicinal Herbs" == |
|||
Someone needs to start an article on "[[List of Medicinal Herbs]]" with links to the various plant articles. [[Special:Contributions/2602:306:C518:62C0:6800:3456:2F93:AB51|2602:306:C518:62C0:6800:3456:2F93:AB51]] ([[User talk:2602:306:C518:62C0:6800:3456:2F93:AB51|talk]]) |
Revision as of 01:50, 25 July 2012
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Herbal medicine article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: Index, Index, 1, 2, 3, 4 |
Clean start
Note: WP:DNFTT. Trolling comments that violate WP:NOTAFORUM, WP:NPA and WP:TALK will be deleted in the future and the responsible parties risk blocks. -- Brangifer (talk) 00:17, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).
Criticism
Why is there no criticism section? There are criticisms scattered all over the article, they should be put together so people can easily see. XcepticZP (talk) 20:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
- Personally I like a criticism section but we try to avoid criticism sections here. That's the way our articles are supposed to be written. -- Brangifer (talk) 16:11, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
- I agree why not put all the criticisms on flu vaccines together 14:42, 21 December 2010 (UTC)unknown14:42, 21 December 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.70.14.63 (talk)
- Please sign your posts properly with four tildes, not three or five, and not with "unknown". Just FOUR tildes. -- Brangifer (talk) 16:11, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
True; why do we put criticisms on all other medical practices but never put a criticism section on vaccines? I mean we put it on pharmasudical medicines why not put one here on this article and in the vaccine articles? 68.70.14.63 (talk) 15:07, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
- Was there ever a consensus not to have a criticism section? If not, I will start one, unless there is a really good reason why I should not.HkFnsNGA (talk) 02:11, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
Agreed start one se we can pull the criticisms all into 1 place. Granted if we do we will have to take all the criticisms in the article and relocate them into that place.Ploxboy119 (talk) 02:11, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
- A non-biased article should always have a section on criticism. If criticism has a negative connotation, then called it "critique". Critique has always found expression in academic essays, policy position papers, trade journals, periodicals, political and religious leaflets, civic testimony, and judicial cross examination, so what is wrong with it? And as XcepticZP says, "There are criticisms scattered all over the article", so it sounds ironical that if you scatter it, it is okay, but if you gather them into one section, then it is not. — PM Poon (talk) 12:42, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Misuse of sources
This article has been edited by a user who is known to have misused sources to unduly promote certain views (see WP:Jagged 85 cleanup). Examination of the sources used by this editor often reveals that the sources have been selectively interpreted or blatantly misrepresented, going beyond any reasonable interpretation of the authors' intent.
Please help by viewing the entry for this article shown at the page, and check the edits to ensure that any claims are valid, and that any references do in fact verify what is claimed.
I searched the page history, and found 12 edits by Jagged 85 (for example, see this edits). Tobby72 (talk) 15:52, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
There is no article on the herb Gokulakanta why?
Please you people out there write an article on Gokulakanta. I have been trying to find a source for the herb to buy it but with no success. An article needs to be written on it to create more public awareness. 108.81.134.236 (talk) 22:05, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- We can't help buying but the herb seems to be something of the Indian mallow aka Abutilon, possibly Hygrophila spinosa kind and if you search for that name you will find at least some sources at pubmed. I am good on biochemical aspects but not an expert in botanics. Let us know what you find. - Richiez (talk) 22:48, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Why is there two pages of articles for Hygrophila spinosa on the internet? When I click on your link above I am given a different wiki version then the one I am seeing from a Bing Search here in Ohio with the keyword "Hygrophila spinosa". Some weird games are going on and I suspect the government may be behind it. Even the talk pages were different. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygrophila_auriculata What is weird I compared the two links from both versions of the page and the link is the same. Is this some kind of phishing going on? Am I being directed to alternate wikiversions depending on where I enter them from the internet? Is this being done through poisoning of my DNS Cache? 108.81.134.236 (talk) 02:50, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
- Please double check and post detailed information to Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical). -- 18:21, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
Article needed on "List of Medicinal Herbs"
Someone needs to start an article on "List of Medicinal Herbs" with links to the various plant articles. 2602:306:C518:62C0:6800:3456:2F93:AB51 (talk)