Talk:Commiphora gileadensis

Balance of article
I've reverted the addition of an isolated technical claim as probably WP:UNDUE in a short article. If we are to include a technical discussion in the article, it needs to be on the basis of a proper section on each topic - the chemistry of the plant, its pharmacology, its history - with different sources properly balanced. Readers will simply find isolated facts confusing and may evaluate them as more important than they are. The pharmacological effects appear to be at most lightly explored, in which case an appropriate treatment of them might be to say that not much research has been done, but the possible effects include a, b, and c. But first the article needs much further development. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:07, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Deciduous
The indicates it is so. Lmstearn (talk) 08:56, 17 December 2023 (UTC)