Talk:Datura stramonium/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Book excerpt

What about that "book excerpt"? That the standard procedure for such things, or is there a better way? Thanx 68.39.174.150 00:42, 27 April 2005 (UTC)

Layout

This article has a lot of good information, but I believe the layout to be a little funky: there is a lot of history of accidental colonial poisonings, but no description of the habitat of where it is found. There are constant references to the use as a hallucinogen, but no references on how it propagates itself. What I would propose is that there is a general new format for this article: it would start off with a general description of the plant, describing its appearance and mentioning Bold textits history of usage. Then there is a section called "Cultivation and uses". In this section there would be a description of the habitat and range of Datura stramonium as well as reference to the shamaic usages of it. Then there can be a section called "Effects" in which the physiological and subjective effects of Jimsonweed are described, as well as a strong warning against any recreational use. The article can then end with the "History" section, in which the colonial anecdotes can be organized.

This is only my idea for a restructuring the article, if no one objects to it, I will start working on it shortly. Muggwort17 14:49, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Go for it. It needs it. 8) --Rockero 02:14, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Possible Additional info for this article

I remember reading an article about the effects of using Jimsonweed as a hallucinogen, but I don't remember where I read it. It gave an anecdote of a German college student who, while in a Jimsonweed-induced delirium, severed his own tounge and genitals with gardening shears. Again, I don't remember where I read this, but if someone could find that kind of information, It would benefit this article. Kazhivlad 00:09, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

The use of this plant is a major element in the novel 'Clean Cut' by Lynda La Plante; although, in the book, the effects are supposedly cumulative and incurable, as well as being untraceable in normal autopsy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.27.165.198 (talk) 06:29, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I added some info, and a question

I'm surprised the article didn't mention anything about the plant's amazing tendency for the flowers to open and close at night, so I added it. That trait's earned it the nickname "Moonflower." However, I don't live anywhere near this plant (though I am fascinated by it) so my info may be a little off...could any "locals" fix that if I'm wrong?

Also, the article incorrectly stated that all parts of the plant produced a fould oder when crushed or bruised. This is not true with the leaf of the plant; when bruised, it produces a smell extreamly similar to that of penut butter. I changed that in the article, but if it still should say "foul" (I don't know why anyone'd call penut butter foul, though) then please change it.

Well, foul is subjective, I also, if I remember correctly, footnoted that piece of information. What's more I one time found a datura stramonium plant, and did crush up a leaf and smell it. The smell was of night shade, not peanut butter. I know original research isn't allowed, but I am going to change back the part about smells and put the footnote back. Muggwort17 15:02, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Mostly a poor article; please cite individual experiences from Erowid, otherwise leaving the reader to assume it to be the result of scientific study.

00:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC) Rashad9607

"Zombie's Cucumber"

Many different sources list jimson weed as "Zombie's Cucumber" due to the effects caused by datura. Even though the research used to verify datura as a component of so-called zombie powder, the nickname of the jimson weed is listed on various websites, just google the phrase "Zombie's Cucumber", and many reliable sources of information will have pages listed.

RedDragon501

Saying "google it" is no longer considered adequate sourcing for material - if you have an actual reliable reference for this (not just some lamer's personal website), it should be added to the references section. Stan 20:02, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

capitalisation

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Datura_stramonium&diff=167156916&oldid=167105961 -- since when are common names of plants proper nouns? --BranER —Preceding comment was added at 20:32, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

BranER would actually appear to be correct on this, however word's such as Beelzebub would still be capitalized.

See: http://www.sc.edu/webpresence/editorial_guide/capitalization.html

76.177.69.127 (talk) 13:21, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

For example morning glory, hummingbird vine, iron weed, honeysuckle, creeping phlox would not be capitalized. Names such as Canadian thistle, St. John's wort, and English ivy, would maintain the capitalization of the proper nouns. The common names of animals and plants are not "proper nouns." 76.177.69.127 (talk) 14:13, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Love is NOT a matter of sex. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.197.83.228 (talk) 12:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Active Constituents

Is "Scolpamine" really an alternative spelling to "Scopolamine"; or is it a mistake? It neatly redirects to Scopolamine. Myrvin (talk) 09:03, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Lack of citations

This article has a lot of unreferenced information. I'm working on correcting it, as part of a personal project involving all the Datura species. Also, much of the material on the toxic and hallucinogenic properties of Datura stramonium is in, or should be in, the main Datura article. Lou Sander (talk) 14:22, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Glad to hear it. Hope you're still working on it. It definitley needs some work. Botanical info is too sparse and unclear, IMO. For example, the intro states it is native to N America, but History states it is from Central America or India (but that is unsourced, and probably needs to be removed). Maybe I can find more info in the main Datura article.
Thanks -The myoclonic jerk (talk) 23:09, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I too am interested in furthering the education on this topic as my son died a little over a year ago, however I am not sure how. Even the U of A Medical Center team had limited knowledge on options available to help save my son. I made a small edit and would be happy to do more (Griffins dad (talk) 18:24, 4 April 2009 (UTC))

Please get in touch with me about this. I'm working on a lot of Datura articles, and I have some Datura plants near my house. I'm interested in the toxic aspects. You can post a message on my user page, or send me an email via Wikipedia. Lou Sander (talk) 19:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Anyone else think the story about "a teenager named Griffin" is out of place and entirely unnecessary? This is an informational article, not a high-school anti-drug pamphlet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.192.175.161 (talk) 06:40, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

"Origin" in South America

This article contradicts itself. The intro claims that Datura stramonium is native to South America, but later are the sentences: "The sadhus of Hinduism also used datura as a spiritual tool, smoking it with cannabis in their traditional chillums. It was also widely used by the Magyar (Hungarian) spiritual leaders (the Táltos) since ancient times." There is also a suggestion that the species originated in India. Could someone who knows about such things clear this up? Myron (talk) 05:13, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Unsubstantiated nicknames

None of the numerous nicknames listed in this article are substantiated, so I removed some of them. Some of them are established, but other ones seem downright made-up. Truesader, I'm not trying to mislead anyone. If you want to add them back, find some citations. Athene cunicularia (talk) 03:35, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Truesader speaking. The original article from which I added back the removed information can be found cached from August 7. That person posted misleading information. I added back theirs. The established nickname I have added back is THORN APPLE. I have included a citation. There are more than one that substantiates it. Only for THORN APPLE, not other nicks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truesader (talk) 17:21, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Glad to see the footnotes. That's a lot more constructive than the edit warring which was going on before that. Kingdon (talk) 01:13, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Substantiated by the Royal Horticultural Society.

I recently cited some sources which refer to the usage of Devil's Snare in the Harry Potter books/movies, with recommendations of the Royal Horticultural Society. I needed to be VERY certain that I knew what I was talking about and an antidote after being shown a picture of the spiked fruit. It brought to mind what a certain wise man called Jesus said: One does not gather figs (or apples) from thorns, spines, and prickles or grapes from a bramble. Reference: Bible: Matthew 7:15-20, Luke 6:41-45. Putting together "thorn" and "apple" led to finding this page which led to referring some other people to it to see if we were coming to similar conclusions. This has meant suddenly going from the territory of reader to contributor, not to mention temporary chaos during edits and hours of painstaking research on an unfamiliar subject while investigating citations posted by others in order to clear up the confusion for the sake of a page with accurate information to which people could turn. My work here is done.  :) It was worth it though! Unamusable (talk) 00:10, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Unamusable. I admire your tenacity, and the amount of work and time it has taken you, but I'm afraid your conclusions – and the changes you have made to your headline – are misleading. The identification of Datura stramonium with JK Rowling's imaginary "Devil's Snare" has not been substantiated by the RHS. The Daily Mail report makes the two names synonymous, but the RHS warnings and subsequent comments quoted in that report (and others) in no way refer to Rowling's plant; they refer only to the Datura and its effects, and do not legitimise the linking of the names.
It appears that this mistake can be traced back to the fact that the "Devil's Snare" name has been appearing (on and off) on this Wikipedia page since 20 September 2007, and that page (or one of the many others copied from it) was then read by the journalists who wanted to add a bit of background information to their article. The name, however, had no validity, and was added to this page (probably mischievously) by an anonymous contributor, using a computer with the address 165.154.24.116 – they did not quote any source or authority for the name. (The equally invalid name "Beelzebub's Twinkie" was added two days later, in another anonymous edit, from 75.34.100.79! Why didn't the Daily Mail pick up on that one?)
The Daily Mail seems to have based their story on an earlier, more detailed (but still rather inaccurate) one in the Daily Telegraph which calls it Devil's Apple or Devil's Trumpet in the main text, but "Devil's Snare" in the standfirst. The stories feature different confused pensioners, but quote similar details about the plant, indicating that they have probably consulted the same reference material. The stories then get picked up on, rewritten, requoted (on Ananova, for instance, which quotes the Telegraph story but omits all the correct names) and begin to falsely legitimise each other as a whole series of Chinese whispers ripples out across the internet. SiGarb | (Talk) 23:17, 25 September 2009 (UTC)


Thank you for giving me (finally) the information I was seeking, SiGarb. No doubt some Harry Potter fans were needlessly worried there for a minute. Very pleased that you set the record straight, also glad to see exposed where the wrong information originally came from! Unamusable (talk) 21:31, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Late last year I dug up some scholarly books and did a lot of work on the various Datura articles, of which there are many. Some of them have/had a bunch of nicknames for the plant, some didn't. All these closely-related plants have very widespread habitats, and they probably have dozens of legitimate nicknames in the many locales where they grow. IMHO it's kind of unencyclopedic to include all the nicknames in the lead(s) of the article(s). Maybe nicknames should be covered in separate sections in the articles that have them, or maybe there should be one big nickname section in the main Datura article. I'm too busy with non-Wiki stuff to do it myself right now, but I'd like to know if people support the idea. Lou Sander (talk) 23:45, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Did these scholarly books describe them as "nicknames"? I doubt it. The names quoted here are widespread (and mostly fairly well-known) common names. I agree that common names of plants are a potential minefield, as they are often misleading, sometimes being used for two or more species (which may be totally unrelated), but most plant pages on Wikipedia include common names in the first paragraph or two. Although it would be preferable to use botanical Latin names, as they are unique, but often it is only the common name that readers will recognise. Many Wikipedia articles on plants are even titled by common name (as are most articles on animals – would you search for Vulpes vulpes, or Fox?). So, leave it as it is, I reckon. Where particular species have large numbers of common names, they could have a special "Common names" section, but some would still need to be given in the introduction. SiGarb | (Talk) 20:54, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
No, I guess *I* called 'em nicknames. "Common names" is much better. The situation is 1) there are nine species, all pretty similar, and some so similar that they're hard to tell apart; 2) most of the species are pretty widespread; 3) there are lots and lots of common names spread around among all the species in all the locations where they grow; 4) any editor can make up their own common name, or "remember" it and put it in one of the articles.
Some of these articles seem to list all the common names anybody ever used for any one of these plants, often without citing any references. Others only list a few common names, or maybe none (I haven't checked the details). IMHO it would be good if somebody could go through all of the Datura articles and clean up the "common names" situation. Lou Sander (talk) 01:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Yep, any editor can make up, or "remember", a common name, but they should also include a ref for it. If it can't be verified on a reputable website or in an easily accessible printed source, it will be challenged, sooner or later, and rightly so. I haven't time to check all the common names; I checked out the South African ones and provided a ref. I think "angel's trumpet" and "thorn apple" are probably quite widespread for several species. I think it would be too prescriptive to say each article could only quote one (or 2, or 3) common name/s. For a particularly widespread plant, the first para could mention 2 or 3 of the most common, and then refer to a Common names section below. SiGarb | (Talk) 20:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
I generally agree with the paragraph above, but I wonder if it's the mission of an encyclopedia to list ALL the referenced common names of a plant. I looked quickly at all the articles, and there's a huge variation in their treatment of common names. Most have one or none, and one has a bunch. IMHO it's a worthwhile project to clean 'em up. I don't have time right now, but I've sort of "adopted" these articles as a group, so if nobody else works on it, I probably will. Lou Sander (talk) 02:25, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Toxicity

Someone has rightly asked for a citation on the toxicity of this species. Plenty of citations exist for the nasty effects of Datura intoxication. Like the nicknames (above), there is a lot of information about toxicity in the various Datura articles, and there is great overlap among the species. They all have basically the same group of toxic compounds and effects. These should probably be collected in the main article, then referred to in each of the species articles. It wouldn't be hugely difficult. Lou Sander (talk) 08:03, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I went ahead and put a small, properly referenced, Toxicity section in each of the Datura articles. These sections need a few properly referenced words about the tendency of people to ingest these plants, what constituents cause the hallucinogenic properties, and what symptoms result. I'll do it if I can find the time. Lou Sander (talk) 22:43, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Somebody put an interesting, but unreferenced, comment into the "References" section. If the claim can be substantiated through a proper citation, it would be a good addition to the "Toxicity" section. Otherwise, it should be deleted. Lou Sander (talk) 12:42, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Botticelli's Venus and Mars

Thank you Tsinfandel for the interesting info & article link on Boticelli's painting. I do have to revert the edit though because it was a gross misidentification of the plant in the painting. Datura (and especially D. stramonium) are known as the thorn apples because of their very deeply thorny seed pods, as can be seen in Brugmansia & Datura by Ulrike & Hans George Preissel, pg 124; and also here is a link to many Google images of these seed pods: Datura stramonium. The leaves, too, are really nothing even similar to Datura or Brugmansia. Also, Datura stramonium are endemic to the southeast of North America, and would not have been spread to Europe until well after Christopher Columbus' voyage in 1492 (same reference), however Botticelli's Venus & Mars was painted c. 1483. Tom Hulse (talk) 18:29, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

So how was "it was mentioned earlier by the Persian physician Avicenna in 11th century Persia"? It must be frustrating but your contribution violates NOR. And it is you against Kew. First publish then return. Perhaps you could find a reliable source that enriches the interesting discussion rather than squashes it. Tsinfandel (talk) 19:43, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


Hello Tsinfandel. :) Per your cited article, this plant was specifically identified by an unknown source at Kew as Datura stramonium. However, Avicenna mentioned D. metel ("Jouzmathal", which means "metel nut" actually), and there is no evidence he had ever known of the plant we call Datura stramonium.

If you wish to get ultra-technical about NOR, and view my cited sources as a "synthesis" of sources, then we must also look closer at reliable sources for your post. Since the article is brand-new and postulates a theory that is new and contrary to long established understanding in the art world (by it's own admission), and is contested here & on it's own web site, it is subject to peer review/consensus before it can be considered a reliable source, and it may not be used yet. I will of course wait for your comments before re-deleting the posts, but really they must come down. The reliable sources requirement was created for just such a situation as this.

On the separate issue of 'me vs. Kew', it is not relevant specifically because I am not a source, but it is relevant to help show you why it is important that we follow reliable sources on this one, because this article will certainly be discredited (already started). It doesn't sound like you are aware of what the ISHS is. I am certain there is no one at Kew who would feel qualified to override the ISHS Registrar for the genus Datura on a question like this. It just doesn't work like that. If you review that link I posted above to the Google pics of Datura Stramonium (and compare them to Boticelli's painting, you can see for yourself that this article will in fact be surely discredited, and therefore why it is important we follow reliable sources. Tom Hulse (talk) 21:22, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Avicenna

Removing sentence mentioning Avicenna, since he wrote of metel nut (Datura metel), and not Datura stramonium, which also would not have escaped outside the SE US until sometime after the 1400's. Tom Hulse (talk) 18:38, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Historical medical use

A recent historical note in the NEJM noted that inhaling Datura stramonium smoke "was probably the best" of the limited treatment options for asthma available in the early 19th century, and was a forerunner of modern antimuscarinics used for that purpose. Apparently "asthma cigarettes" made out of the plant were even sold commercially for a time. Perhaps someone who knows more about this can add something? --Delirium (talk) 19:11, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Adding a belated note here, for the benefit of talk-page readers, that Jrtayloriv has since added a nicely referenced section on this topic. --Delirium (talk) 20:17, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was not moved. --BDD (talk) 19:11, 22 October 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)


Datura stramonium → Jimsonweed – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Jimsonweed is by far the most commonly used name for this plant. ANDROS1337TALK 05:09, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

  • Oppose Please continue to read farther down that page you referenced, at WP:COMMONNAME, under the subheading Explicit conventions. Common names are not used for all Wikipedia articles where specific conventions prevail, such as the one it mentions for WP:FLORA, where it says that for most plant articles "scientific names are to be used...". This is an established Wikipedia guideline. --Tom Hulse (talk) 05:56, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Indeed, except for the detail that it also says that exceptions can be determined by consensus on a case-by-case basis. Considering that is exactly what ANDROS is trying to do here, why try to stop it? Powers T 01:11, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
That's not really what it says. Exceptions are not allowed by consensus on a case-by-case basis for all articles; only those like rose, apple, & watermelon who have "an agricultural, horticultural, economic or cultural use that makes them more prominent in some other field than in botany". He is not at all making the case that Jimsonweed rises to that level of prominence, and it would be silly to do so. Instead his case is that Jimsonweed is a more common name, which is completely irrelevant according to WP:FLORA (even this irrelvant argument is not correct as Rkitko points out below). If you hang out at WP:PLANTS where these frequently come up, you would see that this is exactly what the guideline was developed for, and that this RM is eligble for summary dismissal by an administrator. --Tom Hulse (talk) 02:07, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose per WP:FLORA. By far more Google Scholar and Books hits for "Datura stramonium" than "Jimsonweed", suggesting that the scientific name is, in fact, the most commonly used name in reliable sources when discussing this species. That makes the current title perfectly in line with WP:COMMONNAME. Rkitko (talk) 19:54, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose per WP:FLORA. While jimsonweed most often refers to D. stramonium, D. wrightii and D. inoxia/meteloides are also referred to as jimsonweed in both lay and scholarly sources. The common name doesn't map precisely to a scientific name. Redirecting Jimsonweed and Jimson weed to Datura may be appropriate.Plantdrew (talk) 05:42, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose per above. In passing, in my neck-of-the-woods the common name is "datura" or sometimes "night-blooming datura". --Bejnar (talk) 21:05, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Inaccuracy.

"delirium (as contrasted with hallucinations)". This is false. It is known to cause vivid hallucinations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77Mike77 (talk • contribs) 19:36, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Confirmed: Plant is eaten by South Amaerican Indians specifically as a hallucinogen. It also hampers motor coordination.

Also: This statement: " freely branching herb that forms a bush up to 2 to 5 ft (60 to 150 cm) tall." If I post 5 pictures of 5 plants ALL more than 5 feet high, will you change it? well, guess the truth remains a distant dream.

I found the source: "The latter name refers to the spiny seed-bearing capsules. Most of the species are low, shrubby or sprawling annuals or perennials, but some tree-like forms may reach 11 meters (36 feet) in height." http://waynesword.palomar.edu/ww0703.htm

"Toloache" is not a spanish word.

You can find a list of spanish names for this plant at http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datura_stramonium under the "Nombres vernáculos" section.

The word Toloache is of american origin. I have found at http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datura_ferox that this word is Náhuatl ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nahuatl ). The name "Toloache" is used probably only in Mexico. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.76.246.92 (talk) 17:12, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

loco weed v locoweed

is this not the plant also called loco weed cattle that ate it behaved crazy maybe only in sw us .......ck — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.222.170.54 (talk) 06:34, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Jimsonweed or "loco weed" (two words) is different from the "locoweed" that has a toxic effect on cattle. --Naaman Brown (talk) 01:51, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

What does "coolers" mean?

We tried to translate the article into Japanese, but none of us know what "coolers" means which is written in its quotation part. It says "one of the greatest coolers in the world." Would any of you tell us what it means?--Akiyama(tentative) (talk) 18:12, 8 February 2015 (UTC)

Well 1705 is quite along time ago, but I'd guess it's meant to mean anything that reduces or "cools" passions, excitement, aggression, etc. As in the phrase "to cool their ardour." Martinevans123 (talk) 18:31, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Martinevans123 is correct. More specifically, it goes back to Humorism, an outdated medicinal belief that one's personality is determined high high or low different bodily fluids are. By "coolers," Robert Beverley meant that the plant would either reduce their blood and yellow bile levels, or else increase their phlegm and black bile levels. If the Japanese Wikipedia has a relevant article, you might want to link to it. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:45, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
Humorism, It makes sense to me! Thanks you two, your answers will be a great help to us.--Akiyama(tentative) (talk) 11:46, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Datura stramonium. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:12, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Smell

The article says it is 'foul-smelling' with 'fragrant' flowers. Can anybody describe the smell? How strong is it (how close one has to be to the plant to smell it)? Can it be kept inside a house? 85.117.121.47 (talk) 22:18, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Why is "nightshade" uncapitalised unlike "Datura"?

It reads... "is a plant species in the nightshade family and Datura genus" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.27.177.112 (talk) 09:24, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

This is not the Datura article

There's a lot of confusion between Jimsonweed, in the narrow sense, which is apparently this species, and in the broader sense, which is the main common name for the entire genus. This species is the only one people know in the eastern US and Europe and apparently was also the main species used in medicine, so older sources (and some of the more poorly-researched modern ones) tend to assume that all references to Datura are this species. This needs to be cleared up

Zuñi usage has nothing to do with this species- they had their own species. Likewise, the plants known to California Indian cultures were Datura wrightii (mostly) and Datura discolor (in the desert). If you look at any of the ethnographies and dictionaries covering California and other southwestern Indians, they almost all specifically say "Datura meteloides" (a synonym for Datura wrightii) unless they say Datura discolor or some other southwestern/Mexican species like Datura innoxia. Georgia O'Keefe's paintings aren't this species, either- they would have been a southwestern species (this species is one of the most nondescript-looking in the genus).

While we're at it, is this a Central American or a North American species? Currently, different parts of this article disagree. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:33, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Removal of popular culture section

Hi @Plantdrew: I don't think this should've been removed. Those two reasons in the edit summary are inadequate. Invasive Spices (talk) 17:39, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Datura_stramonium/Archive_1&oldid=1069632114"