Talk:Eriogonum jamesii

Source for used as contraceptive
Eriogonum jamesii has been used as oral contraceptive by Navajo indians.


 * I was going to properly format the citation, but I don't think the above source qualifies as reliable source. Comments from anyone? (Btw, I added the section heading for this topic.) --Racerx11 (talk) 00:18, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

In popular culture
The section 'In popular culture' doesn't seem to have a point. It says, '(Eriogonum jamesii) may be called a Colita such as in..."Hotel California"', but then it goes on to say the word "colita" in "Hotel California" doesn't refer to eriogonum jamesii at all, but something completely different. So if the point of the section is to dispel a misconception, then shouldn't the section begin with wording along the lines of "Contrary to popular belief..."? If this isn't a misconception, then should it simply be deleted, as it doesn't really say anything?

This page probably doesn't get much traffic. After some time, I may boldly make some changes in the event of no feedback. --Racerx11 (talk) 00:18, 3 March 2012 (UTC)


 * In the Eagles' Hotel California (song), the term "colitas" refers to the Cannabis plant, not Eriogonum jamesii. At a minimum, any mention of the song in this article should be qualified with "contrary to popular belief" but only if it can be established that that is indeed a popular belief. Otherwise, it should not be mentioned at all. Piriczki (talk) 13:45, 3 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I agree, Piriczki. I can see no reason to believe that there exists a "popular belief" or a "common misconception" that the word "colitas" refers to Eriogonum jamesii. I think most people (correctly) assume it is a reference to marijauna. According to the article Hotel California (song): "The term "colitas" in the first stanza of the song is a Spanish term for "little tails" and in Mexican slang it is a reference to the buds of the Cannabis plant.", which is close enough to the common interpretation by most people and there is no reason to make the same statement in this article.


 * Since the section, at worst, contradicts itself and, at best, doesn't really say anything at all relevant to the topic, I am deleting the section.--Racerx11 (talk) 23:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)