Talk:Heirloom plant

message: I agree with the May 25 suggestion that heirloom seed be merged into this article.  They are covering the same topic and this one has been written with a higher quality of writing.  As there has been no discussion regarding the merge after two months, I will go ahead and redirect heirloom seed to this article and merge or rewrite anything pertinent from there into this article. --MPerel  18:31, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I wonder if it would be appropriate to add the  template to this article? Also, perhaps, add heirloom plant to the 'particular' section of the template? Anchoress 22:52, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do not do this now.   That template is under discussion on it's talk page and at Wikipedia:WikiProject Agriculture.  It is very long and unwieldy and proposals for changing it substantially are currently being discussed.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 19:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Agriculture portal? 

message: "To be an heirloom, a plant must be "open-pollinated" No. Whoever wrote this was unaware that heirloom potatoes are not grown from seed. This doesn't apply to heirloom apples and other fruits, either: they are propagated from cuttings. I'm sure there are other exceptions. --Wetman (talk) 04:51, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Incorrect

message: Please distinguish between these two terms. "Heritage" is used rather than "Heirloom" in the section about the UK.Rolyatleahcim (talk) 21:04, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: They mean the same in this context. "Heritage" is the more usual term in the UK, but "heirloom" is increasingly common, perhaps influenced by American usage. --Ef80 (talk) 12:54, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Heritage vs Heirloom 

message: One school of thought places an age or WILL date point on the cultivars.
--- 172.254.124.57 (talk) 17:02, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  To be fixed later 

message: This statement and the supporting reference is problematic.
In some jurisdictions, laws have been proposed that would make seed saving itself illegal.
According to an acquaintance who has read the original legislation in Spanish: The resolution made agreements between farmers and seed-sellers legally enforceable contracts ... meaning they couldn't save and replant patented seed. Before this resolution, it was unclear whether Colombia patent law would cover modern seed technology, and without it, none of the seed sellers were willing to do business with Colombia. Any growing and saving of seed from local non-patented varieties was still OK.
Unfortunately the original URL to the Columbian legislation is 404. Wayback Machine has a copy, in PDF format without any underlying text. Are there any wikipedians with Spanish language skills who want to take a crack?
It seems that anti-GMO / anti-globalization activists have distorted the real nature of the law, which only prohibits replanting patented seeds. Wurdeh (talk) 22:48, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Colombian legislation re: legality of saving seeds 

message: Caught my eye, I was like "WTF?  How can saving seeds be "illegal"?  That's CRAZY."  So I did a search of the Article and there was no other mention or explanation for this, so I had to go to the "Seed Saving" article to find out why.  Makes sense, once you get the idea that some of these plants are patented "intellectual property".  I think this basic fact should be included in this Article so that the Reader doesn't get taken for a loop like I did,  cause I really thought some Editor went WAY off the deep end.  Seed saving is illegal in Colombia, and my first reaction was illegal drugs, like marijuana.68.206.248.178 (talk) 01:52, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seed Saving is SUPER INTERESTING