Talk:Rosemary

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ksoheil.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Antimicrobial activity

Have just re-added two links to peer-reviewed research on the antimicrobial activity of this herb, both in general terms and specifically regarding s. aureus. These were very speedily deleted this afternoon, for no clear reason - which was vexing as this was student work I was supervising. For the avoidance of any confusion, peer reviewed articles are a reliable source of evidence for scientific claims. Please do leave a comment if deleting again. Vivrolfe (talk) 17:52, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Please read WP:MEDRS carefully. Medical claims need more than peer-reviewed primary studies. Peter coxhead (talk) 18:42, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

For medical content, we use systematic reviews of completed, high-quality clinical trials per WP:MEDREV and WP:MEDSCI, neither of which is met by the lab research indicating possible antimicrobial activity, a finding unlikely to be replicated in vivo and so is miscellaneous, primary research and unencyclopedic. Please don't edit war, WP:WAR. --Zefr (talk) 18:47, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Scientific evidence section

It is funny that the current article states that there is "no scienfific evidence to support" any curative properties of rosemary plant, when it was in fact wikipedia that brougfht my attention to it.

Let me explain first: We should make a distinction between "a plant" and its chemical contents, compounds which can be clearly characterized. A plant grown at one location can have a very diferent content that one grown at another location. That needs to be clear at all times in articles. But as far as effects of a certain chemical compound or a mix of chemical compounds go, there should not be any censorship. What brought me to rosemary plant is melissa oficinalis, which upon prolonged dosing had good health effects, so I researched why and arrived at a conclusion of the reason being the rosmarinic acid.

And the wikipedia article states "Rosmarinic acid is a potential anxiolytic as it acts as a GABA transaminase inhibitor... Rosmarinic acid also inhibits the expression of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase via its cyclooxygenase-inhibiting properties... The use of rosmarinic acid is effective in a mouse model of Japanese encephalitis."

So claiming that there is "no scientific evidence" is quite the contrary to the articles on all the individual chemical compounds inside of rosemary plant, the most significantly noticed effect of "GABA transaminase inhibitor". Seeing a trucker chew rosemary may seem weird, but hey, if it works, it works.

My question is: can please statements like "there is no scientific evidence to use of folk remedies" be changed to something less biased against the actual scientific evidence? even saying "...traditionally has been used for... ...with varying levels of success..." is less misleading that outright claim "there is absolutely no scientific evidence". Or the statement can be changed to "there hasn't been much scientific research into these specific folk remedies:..." or something else more neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.64.17.186 (talk) 17:52, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Rosemary is a Salvia

I heard that rosemary, Russian sage and a few other species have been moved to the Salvia genus. Why hasn't it been updated on any Wikipedia sites? I'm not an expert but the evidence seems solid and I'm not really up for re-writing these pages but I would love to see them corrected. I honestly have never even thought of correcting something on Wikipedia until now. Any thoughts? Am i going about this all wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.173.248.110 (talk) 16:06, 2019 February 3 (UTC)

No, you're not wrong. Reliable secondary sources, like the World Checklist of Selected Plant Families, accept the change, so the article nneds to be moved. I'll do it some time if no-one else does first. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:59, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Recent DNA studies have reclassified as Salvia rosmarinus. Maybe there should be a sub-genus like what was done with Perovskia (i.e., create a subgenus Rosmarinus).— Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.161.255.31 (talk) 13:08, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Did you read the article Salvia United, etc.? The evidence for including Rosmarinus in Salvia is not at all solid. They just don't want to split up Salvia. The writers of the article are afraid for the mess of splitting and want to please the public in general, especially in Asia, because the Asian plants will loose the name of Salvia. This article is written by lumpers, the splitters don't agree and the discussion in the international fora is not finished yet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qabol (talk • contribs) 23:41, 27 January 2020 (UTC)

References

Hardiness zones

I'd like to plant some Rosemary in my front yard, but it gets cold enough in the winter for snow, so I did some research, learning about hardiness zones and which one I'm in. I also learned that some cultivars can withstand our winters while others need to be brought indoors. As I'm a "fire and forget" gardener, I'll need to plant one of the hardier ones. As part of my research, I checked this article but found nothing I could use. I no longer need the info myself, but I'd think that enough other people will come here looking for this type of help that it would be a good idea to add something about it. If anybody here knows enough about this to make this addition, it would be appreciated. JDZeff (talk) 19:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Queen

Hello @Surtsicna: If you read the text it is obvious why that is necessary. Invasive Spices (talk) 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Invasive Spices. I have indeed read the text and I still do not see it. Edward is not otherwise mentioned in the text. So why is it necessary? Surtsicna (talk) 16:02, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

Neither she nor her mother was from Britain. Without the king the British connection remains unexplained. Invasive Spices (talk) 15 October 2022 (UTC)

If rosemary becomes established in Britain after being sent to Queen Philippa, then surely this Philippa is queen of a kingdom on the island of Britain. I still do not see how defining her as a wife helps. Surtsicna (talk) 16:42, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

If rosemary becomes established in Britain after being sent to Queen Philippa, then surely this Philippa is queen of a kingdom on the island of Britain. There is no reason to conclude that. Invasive Spices (talk) 16 October 2022 (UTC)

That is a severe underestimation of the reader's intelligence. Besides, he or she who cannot conclude from that that Philippa was the queen of a British kingdom will not conclude that Edward III was its king either. Surtsicna (talk) 18:53, 17 October 2022 (UTC)