Talk:Wyethia amplexicaulis

General clean up and further research
I think I have all easily located basics into the article. Where I think it is thin right now is that there may be more information about animal utilization. Also, help with better wording is appreciated. Thanks, 🌿MtBotany (talk) 19:04, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * , there's more information about human utilization: . Plantdrew (talk) 20:13, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Plantdrew I always hesitate when I see the words, "traditional medicine". Or when I simultaneously see "Infusion or decoction of pulverized root taken as an emetic" and another entry "Root heated, fermented and eaten." I had come across some of that information and was waiting to see if I found more specific information about how heated/fermented before I put in any information about eating it. And I never put in information when it is vague about which people did so. "Montana Indian Food" won't cut it with me. The Shoshoni emetic information seems safe. Most people are not looking for those and it is not as serious like with something like measles where people ought to see a doctor and not rely on "Prof. Hones T. Natural Herbs". 🌿MtBotany (talk) 20:35, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * , I think "traditional medicine" is pretty important to include when that is the key context to other facts about a plant, such as why it has a particular common name (e.g. "wormwood"), a major range expansion due to human dispersal (Acorus calamus), or is threatened by overharvesting (Panax quinquefolius). It is important to phrase things carefully to avoid making statements that imply medical efficacy that's not supported by WP:MEDRS. Phrasing is easier when not listing every condition a plant may have been traditionally used to treat. The Native American Ethnobotany Database isn't "Prof. Hones T. Natural Herbs", although it does have a tendency to boil lengthy descriptions of uses down to a single formulaic sentence (or conversely to take a single sentence in a source that mentions two uses in passing, and split that into separate records for each use). Each use in NAEB is sourced, and a good number of those sources are available in full online (being old enough to be out of copyright, or public domain government publications). Plantdrew (talk) 21:21, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Plantdrew Thanks for your points. I will take some time to review the original sources listed in the database, but I'm going to be away from my computer for a few weeks. 🌿MtBotany (talk) 18:12, 28 August 2023 (UTC)