Jump to content

Talk:Ginseng: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Bchen1100 (talk | contribs)
176 edits
m Removed deprecated parameters in {{Talk header}} that are now handled automatically (Task 30)
 
(46 intermediate revisions by 22 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{Talkheader}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=C|vital=yes|1=
{{Vital article|level=4|topic=Science|subtopic=Biology|class=B}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Dietary Supplements | importance=high }}
{{WikiProject Dietary Supplements | class=B | importance=high }}
{{WikiProject China|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject China|class=Start |importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Korea|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Korea|class=Start |importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Plants|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Plants|class=Start |importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Agriculture|importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject Agriculture|class=Start |importance=mid}}
{{WikiProject East Asia|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject East Asia|class=Start |importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Alternative medicine}}
{{WikiProject Alternative medicine|class=Start}}
}}
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
Line 14: Line 13:
|maxarchivesize = 200K
|maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 1
|counter = 1
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadsleft = 2
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(100d)
|algo = old(730d)
|archive = Talk:Ginseng/Archive %(counter)d
|archive = Talk:Ginseng/Archive %(counter)d
}}
}}
{{Archive box|auto=yes|bot=MiszaBot I|age=100|search=yes}}
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Cornell_University/NS1150_Health,_Health,_and_Society_(Spring_2018) | assignments = [[User:Sl2763|Sl2763]] }}
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Nor/ENGW_3307_Advanced_Writing_in_the_Sciences_B_(S) | assignments = [[User:Bchen1100|Bchen1100]] }}


==Wiki Education assignment: Traditional Chinese Medicine==
== New Panax article ==
{{dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment | course = Wikipedia:Wiki_Ed/Siena_College/Traditional_Chinese_Medicine_(Fall_2022) | assignments = [[User:Sf23olso|Sf23olso]] | reviewers = [[User:SienaTCM|SienaTCM]], [[User:Sienasaint13|Sienasaint13]], [[User:Cam Coe27|Cam Coe27]], [[User:Em09gatt|Em09gatt]], [[User:Mr13maye|Mr13maye]] | start_date = 2022-09-07 | end_date = 2022-12-12 }}


<span class="wikied-assignment" style="font-size:85%;">— Assignment last updated by [[User:Cam Coe27|Cam Coe27]] ([[User talk:Cam Coe27|talk]]) 04:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)</span>
An article for the genus ''Panax'' needs to be created, at least a stub. Panax redirects to Ginseng so some of the information in this article is superfluous to ginseng. I have no idea what this takes to do.[[User:User-duck|User-duck]] ([[User talk:User-duck|talk]]) 01:20, 21 June 2017 (UTC)


:TCM is [[quackery]] which is not used as supposed evidence of medicinal efficacy for ginseng. Read [[WP:MEDRS]] and choose reputable reviews if changes in content are warranted. [[User:Zefr|Zefr]] ([[User talk:Zefr|talk]]) 17:57, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
Most of the comments on this page talked about the reorganization and specification of information of the Ginseng page. I do agree that this page needed these changes, but I also want to point out that the information on this page lacks sufficient detail on each category about ginseng. For example, if you take a look at the History section of the article, many facts reported by the author can be elaborated on to build a strong point or statement. Also, I would like to point out that the "Ginseng Processing" section was confusing because like the previous comments mentioned, I wasn't sure which species of ginseng you were talking or if the types of processing were used on different species of ginseng. I hope my feedback helped with your article.[[User:Bchen1100|Bchen1100]] ([[User talk:Bchen1100|talk]]) 14:09, 17 May 2018 (UTC) [[User:Bchen1100|Bchen1100]] ([[User talk:Bchen1100|talk]]) 14:09, 17 May 2018 (UTC) [[User:User-Bchen1100|User-Bchen1100]] ([[User talk:User-Bchen1100|talk]]) 10:08, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


== Panax article created ==
== Sourcing ==


[[User:Zefr]], can you please review whether the article [[Ginseng]] is adequately sourced? [[User:Maxim Masiutin|Maxim Masiutin]] ([[User talk:Maxim Masiutin|talk]]) 07:37, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
I moved content to create the [[Panax]] article. Primarily, I moved the list of species which I had added previously to this article. I also moved information about the ginseng (the plant) to focus this article on ginseng (the product).[[User:User-duck|User-duck]] ([[User talk:User-duck|talk]]) 18:13, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


:As with any consumed herbs or food ingredients, the literature supporting health effects is dubious and low-quality, exemplified by [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/?term=ginseng+review this PubMed search], which displays sources in [[MDPI]] (predatory) and untrustworthy altmed journals. To keep the information readily understandable for non-science users, I would rely on Drugs.com and MedlinePlus [https://medlineplus.gov/druginfo/natural/1000.html here] and/or [https://medlineplus.gov/druginfo/natural/967.html here], i.e., it is not ''effective'' for anything. [[User:Zefr|Zefr]] ([[User talk:Zefr|talk]]) 20:01, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
== Removing content because of reference. ==
::I read this article and it didn't contain any health claims at all, but I thought you have a different pair of eyes and could notice something that I missed. [[User:Maxim Masiutin|Maxim Masiutin]] ([[User talk:Maxim Masiutin|talk]]) 20:06, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

:::Over the years, there have been many attempts to insert health claims. The section on traditional medicine states well the absence of clear efficacy, and the section on FDA warning letters specifies the regulatory position on US supplement companies which are still marketing ginseng products falsely claimed as therapies. [[User:Zefr|Zefr]] ([[User talk:Zefr|talk]]) 20:12, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
I do not intend to start a "talk" war. A statement along with its reference was removed from this article giving "''commercial site; not a WP:RS source''" as the reason.
::::I removed any unsourced mentions about "therapeutic" properties, can you please review this diff https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Ginseng&diff=1209426548&oldid=1209289836 to let me know whether it addresses your concern and the article content is now OK for you. [[User:Maxim Masiutin|Maxim Masiutin]] ([[User talk:Maxim Masiutin|talk]]) 21:38, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the referenced article was from a commercial site. But that is not disallowed.

I consider the existence of the article ("The piece of work itself") as "proof" of the statement. I chose the particular article because it is in English and primarily explained the cultivation of Korean ginseng. And not about the vendor's products.

I did not implement an "external link". Wikipedia's '''external-link guidelines do not apply to citations to reliable sources within the body of the article.'''

If the supporting reference was unsuitable, the reference should have been removed (probably replaced with {{cn}}), not the statement.

I was not able to find a "non-commercial reliable source". I would appreciate another editor replacing my reference with one.

For these reasons, I am undoing the undo.

From <big>Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources</big>:

'''Definition of a source'''

The word "source" ''when citing sources on Wikipedia'' has three related meanings:
* The piece of work itself (the article, book)
* The creator of the work (the writer, journalist)
* The publisher of the work (for example, [[Random House]] or [[Cambridge University Press]])

'''Vendor and e-commerce sources'''

Although the content guidelines for [[WP:EL|external links]] prohibits linking to "Individual web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services," inline citations may be allowed to e-commerce pages such as that of a book on a bookseller's page or an album on its streaming-music page, in order to [[WP:VERIFY|verify]] such things as titles and running times. Journalistic and academic sources are preferable, however, and e-commerce links should be replaced with non-commercial reliable sources if available.
[[User:User-duck|User-duck]] ([[User talk:User-duck|talk]]) 22:22, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

== Move whole article to "Panax ginseng" ==
{{Discussion top|result=The result of this discussion was not to merge. --[[User:Tisanophile|Tisanophile]] ([[User talk:Tisanophile|talk]]) 09:08, 8 March 2018 (UTC)}}
All other languages have a single article on Ginseng under the heading "Panax ginseng". English should go there, too. <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Antepali|Antepali]] ([[User talk:Antepali#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Antepali|contribs]]) 10:50, 4 August 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

:'''Support''' I agree. Ginseng by default is ''[[Panax ginseng]]'' and the [[American ginseng]] has its own article. --[[User:Guculen|Guculen]] ([[User talk:Guculen|talk]]) 12:32, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
:'''Support''' I agree; but, and this is a big but, this article needs to be rigorously tidied up before any move. If it cannot be tidied up, it should simply be removed.[[User:Everlong Day|Everlong Day]] ([[User talk:Everlong Day|talk]]) 17:31, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
:'''Support''' But I think some content should be moved to ''[[Panax]]''. And some to [[American ginseng]]. --[[User:Postcol|Postcol]] ([[User talk:Postcol|talk]]) 08:45, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
:'''Comment''' There's always a question as to how to best deal with cases like this, where a ''product'' is better known than the ''plant(s)'' from which it is derived. Generally, I think it is best to have two articles, as for [[Tea]] and ''[[Camellia sinensis]]'', or [[Coffee]] and the relevant species of ''[[Coffea]]''. When all aspects are covered in one article, as at [[Apple]], the result can often be that the article is too long and will eventually be forked, or is very "bitty" because it covers so many subtopics. I think either approach can be made to work here, but I agree that the article needs some serious work either way. [[User:Peter coxhead|Peter coxhead]] ([[User talk:Peter coxhead|talk]]) 13:09, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
:'''Oppose''' merge very strongly, for the reasons stated by {{u|Peter coxhead}}. I agree with his arguments but not with his tentativeness in drawing their conclusions. More than one species is used as ginseng root, and the pharmacology and folklore of the root are a quite different focus than the botany of the genus or of each individual species. Precedents from other languages are not only irrelevant but misleading. Other Wikipedias should also split off the article on ''Panax ginseng'' from the article on the root and its uses, for the same reasons the English Wikipedia should retain the existing distinction. If all other Wikipedias do it differently, then they are all wrong and should fix their mistake.
: —[[User:Syrenka V|Syrenka V]] ([[User talk:Syrenka V|talk]]) 21:36, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
: Also: a quite different change from the suggested merge should be made. The hatnote stating that this article is specific to the root of ''Panax ginseng'' should be removed, and the present article should cover the pharmacology and folklore of ''all'' use of ginseng root as a drug, not just that of ''Panax ginseng'' specifically. If there is extensive material on pharmacology and folklore of use as a drug in the articles on the particular species, it should be moved here for unified treatment, and replaced with brief summaries and links to the comprehensive treatment in the present article.
: One concept, one article.
: —[[User:Syrenka V|Syrenka V]] ([[User talk:Syrenka V|talk]]) 21:43, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
:'''Oppose''' "Ginseng" is a general term including all kinds of Ginseng, including American Ginseng. [[User:螺钉|螺钉]] ([[User talk:螺钉|talk]]) 14:10, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
:'''Oppose''' Since I am not a plant scientist, if I were to look for "ginseng" on Wikipedia, it would be for general issues of the plants that are used in tea for medicinal purposes. Whether or not this is Panax, I wouldn't know, and I'd have to check my bottle of "ginseng" to see if I'm using Panax. I note that this article [[Ginseng]] presently lists a variety of plant types that are used as ginseng. I suppose the article [[Panax ginseng]] could use some additional material. Thank you. [[User:Attic Salt|Attic Salt]] ([[User talk:Attic Salt|talk]]) 14:21, 28 February 2018 (UTC)
:'''Oppose''' What really should be done, is to sort out the "Ginseng" page's info out into the respective species pages for Panax notoginseng, Panax quinquefolius, Eleutherococcus senticosus, etc. The "Ginseng" page should be turned into a disambiguation page, with links to the species pages. This will prevent confusion, because with the way it currently is, readers can't be sure which ginseng variety is being talked about at certain points, and it's too easy to mix up details between species. Thanks. [[User:Thorbachev|Thorbachev]] ([[User talk:Thorbachev|talk]]) 20:21, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
{{Discussion bottom}}

Latest revision as of 07:31, 8 October 2024

Wiki Education assignment: Traditional Chinese Medicine

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 September 2022 and 12 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sf23olso (article contribs). Peer reviewers: SienaTCM, Sienasaint13, Cam Coe27, Em09gatt, Mr13maye.

— Assignment last updated by Cam Coe27 (talk) 04:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

TCM is quackery which is not used as supposed evidence of medicinal efficacy for ginseng. Read WP:MEDRS and choose reputable reviews if changes in content are warranted. Zefr (talk) 17:57, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing

[edit]

User:Zefr, can you please review whether the article Ginseng is adequately sourced? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 07:37, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As with any consumed herbs or food ingredients, the literature supporting health effects is dubious and low-quality, exemplified by this PubMed search, which displays sources in MDPI (predatory) and untrustworthy altmed journals. To keep the information readily understandable for non-science users, I would rely on Drugs.com and MedlinePlus here and/or here, i.e., it is not effective for anything. Zefr (talk) 20:01, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I read this article and it didn't contain any health claims at all, but I thought you have a different pair of eyes and could notice something that I missed. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 20:06, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Over the years, there have been many attempts to insert health claims. The section on traditional medicine states well the absence of clear efficacy, and the section on FDA warning letters specifies the regulatory position on US supplement companies which are still marketing ginseng products falsely claimed as therapies. Zefr (talk) 20:12, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I removed any unsourced mentions about "therapeutic" properties, can you please review this diff https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Ginseng&diff=1209426548&oldid=1209289836 to let me know whether it addresses your concern and the article content is now OK for you. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 21:38, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ginseng&oldid=1250058276"