User talk:RicardoHerb

Welcome!

Hello, RicardoHerb, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Rkitko (talk) 18:59, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Rhodiola rosea
Hi there. Please add a reference (a reliable source) for where you got your information on the Rhodiola rosea article. You'll notice that I reverted your edits as part of the bold, revert, discuss cycle. Do not continue to engage in an edit war and instead discuss the edits. If you continue, you may be temporarily banned from editing if you violate the three revert rule. We can discuss it here or at Talk:Rhodiola rosea. Cheers, Rkitko (talk) 18:59, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


 * You'll note that the statement "one company claims" is all my statement said. It's something interesting, it relates to the topic, and anyone who wanted to research that statement could find that it says very clearly on that company's website that there are 20+ compounds in the herb and that they standardize on 13 of them when producing their extract. As that's trade secret territory, I don't think we're going to get much else from them. Other articles, including those from well known Rhodiola researchers point to more than simply Rosavins and Salidroside as being critical to the effect of Rhodiola. By continuing to remove that statement, you are yourself editing more than 3 times. That line was in the text for a year or two, and I think it should go back. RicardoHerb (talk) 00:04, 25 March 2011 (UTC)


 * One company is not a reliable source for information like that, especially since, as you note, the information is likely proprietary. You'd be better off searching the academic literature or even scholarly books for this information. Google Books and Google Scholar can be great resources for finding such literature. In order to be a trusted source, Wikipedia needs to rely on the best sources of information, citing them properly. An assertion that "one company claims" something without a reliable source does not improve the encyclopedia and should not have remained in the article for so long without a source. Rkitko (talk) 00:54, 25 March 2011 (UTC)