Talk:Limnophila aromatica

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Heavenlyblue in topic 'Culinary use' section needs work

Family? edit

According to the Plantaginaceae article, this genus has been reassigned from the family Scrophulariaceae to the family Plantaginaceae. Can this be confirmed? Badagnani 04:47, 13 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging edit

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} 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) 11:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)Reply

Not Vietnamese "ngo om"?! edit

The picture shown is not that of the Vietnamese "ngo om"! AFAICT, "ngo om" is also known as "rice paddy herb". A Google'ing for "ngo om" does return pics of the actual "ngo om" herb, which looks nothing like the pic in this article! Unless there is further objection or if there is a credible reference, I'm going to remove the "ngo om" claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aqn (talkcontribs) 23:17, 23 February 2012 (UTC)Reply

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion edit

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:51, 30 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

'Culinary use' section needs work edit

The 'Culinary use' section is in some disarray. For example: "It is used most often in Vietnamese cuisine, where it is called ngò om. It is an ingredient in canh chua, a sweet and sour seafood soup which also includes tamarind, not to be confused with ngò gai which is also added as an accompaniment to the noodle soup called phở." This means that tamarind is not to be confused with ngò gai. Surely the intent is that ngò om not be confused with ngò gai. Heavenlyblue (talk) 23:21, 26 January 2021 (UTC)Reply