Talk:Ancient woodland

message: I did have further comments to make in respect of the preceding discussion, but will respect its (somewhat premature) closure and the decision to keep the title of the article uncapitalised.
There is no doubt that Ancient Woodland is a formal designation and that such designations are normally capitalised.  However, I was unable to find good evidence that this convention is commonly followed in this particular case.  Even bodies heavily involved in protecting Ancient Woodlands such as Natural England, the Woodland Trust and the Forestry Commission commonly use lower case initials, even when talking about the designation.  I have therefore revised my opinion.  I still consider that it is logical and better to capitalise, and that not doing so is incorrect.  However, if the official bodies do not feel the need to do it, there is no great harm in Wikipedia following them.  --Richard New Forest (talk) 19:41, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Decision not to capitalise

message: Does anyone know if these are the same thing? Natural England shapefiles use ARW for what could well be the same as PAWS. (I've just added a mention of ARW to the article.) --Northernhenge (talk) 20:57, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it means "Planted Ancient Woodland Site".  So it is a site with Ancient Replanted Woodland, nearly the same thing – a particular site, rather than a general concept.  Richard New Forest (talk)
PAWS is Plantation in ancient woodland site, its name is as it suggests, a plantation that is planted where previously there was ancient woodland, often that that has been felled for timber or possible plannted on a glade (or unfortnatly sometimes the woodland was clearfelled for the porpous of planting a plantation) (Pcwizme (talk) 20:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  PAWS and Ancient Replanted Woodland 

message: Currently a red link - I'm not sure whether this is a page which has been deleted or whether it just hasn't been created yet, but perhaps the information on this page could be expanded (and include links Natural England's lists or similar) and then a redirect set up from Ancient Woodland Indicators to this page - does that sound a sensible suggestion?  Dom Kaos (talk) 17:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Ancient Woodland Indicators

message: There are a lot of images on this page and not all of them are directly to do with ancient woodland. If you think they are, please caption them accordingly. Otherwise I'm going to go through it with a critical eye sooner or later.
At the moment I would keep:
*Ancient woodland at Brading
*A recently coppiced alder stool in Hampshire
*Ancient pollarded beech tree
Naturenet | Talk 16:58, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. It could be argued that there's space for one of the flower images—to illustrate the species listed in that part of the text—though it would be preferable if an image could be found of an indicator species within an ancient woodland setting, rather than just a close-up. Similarly the image of the wattle being constructed could be kept as illustration of text within the History section, though again a more illustrative image would be preferable. But all the other close-up images of flowers should go. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 17:28, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too many images 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Ancient woodland. 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/20081112064714/http://www.backonthemap.org.uk:80/ to http://www.backonthemap.org.uk/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927190147/http://www.woodland-trust.org.uk/accessibility/documents/kwa_loss.htm to http://www.woodland-trust.org.uk/accessibility/documents/kwa_loss.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.ancient-tree-hunt.org.uk/ancienttrees/managing/guides
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) 15:54, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Ancient woodland. 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/20140519154448/http://www.backonthemap.org.uk/woodland/whatisancientwoodland to http://www.backonthemap.org.uk/woodland/whatisancientwoodland
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) 17:37, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Per https://www.tuba.gov.tr/tr/yayinlar/suresiz-yayinlar/raporlar/ancient-woodlands-and-trees-a-guide-for-landscape-planners-and-forest-managers-1/the-ancient-woodland-concept-as-a-practical-conservation-tool-the-turkish-experience
The first sentence would need to be changed or pushed down - any suggestion for new first sentence? 
Or should I edit old growth forest or indeed should the articles be merged or the lead of this excerpted there?
Chidgk1 (talk) 11:54, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is at the moment specifically about the UK definition of ancient woodland, which is something fairly well defined and not particularly relevant to non-UK woodlands. Ancient woodland could be argued to include subsets of old-growth forest, but paradoxically can also include woodlands that have been very recently replanted. I do not think that it would be useful to internationalise this article or merge it with another; but quite possibly you could improve old growth forest. Naturenet | Talk 18:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: ok thanks will edit Old-growth forest Chidgk1 (talk) 18:56, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any objection if I globalize the article with a couple of sentences?