Talk:Boldo

message: Wikipedia:Categorization#Some general guidelines says "Articles should not usually be in both a category and its subcategory." This article is currently in :Category:Medicinal plants, :Category:Medicinal herbs and fungi, and :Category:Herbs, when :Category:Medicinal plants is a subcategory of :Category:Medicinal herbs and fungi and :Category:Medicinal herbs and fungi is a subcategory of :Category:Herbs. I'm not going to get into a revert war about this, because it's such a trivial issue, but I think the guidelines are pretty clear. —Keenan Pepper 23:45, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In this case the categories are not mutually exclusive and illogically constructed.  Boldo is used as both an herb (culinary) as well as a medicinal herb, and thus Wikipedia users will be able to find it when searching either of those categories, as it should be.  Similarly, the subcategory "Medicinal plants" is illogical as a subcategory of "Medicinal herbs and fungi."  Badagnani 00:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then why don't you fix the categories themselves? —Keenan Pepper 00:47, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

text: I've placed a tag on the "Medicinal plants" category suggesting that it be merged into "Medicinal herbs and fungi."  Regarding the "Herbs" and "Medicinal herbs and fungi" cats, I would place herbs that are used for culinary purposes into the "Herbs" category, and herbs that are used for medicinal purposes into the "Medicinal herbs and fungi" category.  Herbs that are used for both logically should be in both categories, because in this case the stringent adherence to keeping categories and their subcategories mutually exclusive does not make logical sense or help the user in finding what they need to find.  Badagnani 01:02, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: I´m brazilian and, yes, it´s true: almost everyone (specially in the counryside) has a little boldo plant in the garden. However, it´s important to know that there is many kinds of boldo besides that from Chile; that´s why here in Brazil we call it Chile`s Boldo.
Other kind of Boldo, despite used for the same purposes, is very different from the first; the species is Coleus barbatus, it´s much smaller and is the most common here in our gardens; it has many centuries ago with the African slaves.
There is another type, Vernonia condensata, it´s called Bahia´s Boldo, it also came from Africa and is totally different from the other two. --—Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.52.74.63 (talk • contribs) 
:Why not add that to the article?  Badagnani 19:08, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other kinds of Boldo 

message: This article talk page was automatically added with  banner as it falls under :Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 11:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [[WP:FOOD|WikiProject Food and drink]] Tagging

message: I think the data on the distribution of the plant, as well as its status as endemic are wrong. As the article mentions, it's consumed in Peru, where it grows/is cultivated. This wouldn't be possible if in fact the plant was endemic of central Chile. It might be the case that the plant has been introduced to Peru and other countries, in which case it shouldn't be called endemic but as originating from Chile. Endemism implies a species is restricted in its distribution so that it can't survive anywhere else in the planet.
By the way, I read the section above about several plants being called Boldo in South America. The plant to which I'm referring is the one described in this article. Asinthior (talk) 18:10, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not endemic 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Boldo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140323002129/http://www.anvisa.gov.br/hotsite/farmacopeiabrasileira/conteudo/Formulario_de_Fitoterapicos_da_Farmacopeia_Brasileira.pdf to http://www.anvisa.gov.br/hotsite/farmacopeiabrasileira/conteudo/Formulario_de_Fitoterapicos_da_Farmacopeia_Brasileira.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:36, 5 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified