The "little stubble" really isn't significant for identification.

You didn't look very hard. Here's a close-up of a leafy stem showing the
axillary leaflets. Happy now? As the plant matures they elongate into
branches.

http://www.aphotoflora.com/Artemisia...f-29-06-04.jpg

I have the weed growing in my yard and have first hand knowledge of what it
looks like. If you actually looked at the pix in the links, you would have
seen it does not have attractive flowers. Its not a Chrysanthemum, babe. The
superficial resemblance of the foliage is how the weed gets a foothold into
most gardens.

For ideal identification, the plant should be in bloom and that would remove
any doubt.

Several people have asked you if the plant is aromatic and you still have
not answered.


wrote in message
oups.com...
Whoa - calm down buddy. I appreciate you posting, but I loked through
maybe 200 pictures from the link yousent, and as I posted, I couldn't
find any pictures that displayed the stuble along the branch as I have
on my plant. I don't think it's crazy to ask for a second opinion
before I pull up a full bed of something which may end up being an
attractive flower.

Cereus-validus....... wrote:
What an unappreciative jerk. Who are you to question?

The link I gave you had hundreds of pix. Look again, dummy.


wrote in message
oups.com...
The leaves look quite similair, but I can't find a picture of Artemisia
vulgaris with the small starts along the main branch like this has; If
someone else wouldn't mind weighing in before I pull them all up I'd
appreciate it!