Talk:Mesic habitat
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
DO NOT REVERT WITHOUT READING!:
[edit]I removed a sentence, complete with its SUPPOSED source. I'm going to explain to you why the sentence is nonsense, a false claim, made to fit s.th. into the theme of the article that just DOES NOT fit there.
PLEASE READ, and CONSIDER (instead of just pushing "revert-button",) this:
The title of the source is: "Abrupt transition of mesic grassland to shrubland: evidence for thresholds, alternative attractors, and regime shifts"
Which means, that the scientists studied CASES WHERE there is an abrupt kind of border line between two habitat types instead of just slowly becoming the other type.
IT DOES ***NOT*** MEAN/SAY that abrupt transition is the only one possible from mesic to others. !!!!
so I removed this:
"Mesic habitats transition to xeric shrublands in a non-linear fashion, which is evidence of a threshold.[1]"
It WOULD be possible to write a correct sentence about what the study did, but that would just serve to press the study into Wikipedia forcedly although the studis contents is NOT the subject of this article.
If people have read the whole thing and believe it gives nice additional information they can always read the source link UNDER the article as "further reading"/"literature"/"sources"/" references" or how ever to call it, but NOT as a nonsensical statement - really a lie - as it was until now.
In case there are important informations really about the article's theme, then THOSE can be given in he text, and referenced, of course. Just now that wasn't the case.
SO PLEASE REFRAIN FROM (stupidly, sorry) INTANTLY REVERTING!!!! (as it is done MUCH to often lately ! ) 2A02:3035:81B:5B20:1:0:897B:F394 (talk) 10:51, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
References
- ^ Ratajczak, Zak; Nippert, Jesse B.; Ocheltree, Troy W. (September 2014). "Abrupt transition of mesic grassland to shrubland: evidence for thresholds, alternative attractors, and regime shifts". Ecology. 95 (9): 2633–2645. doi:10.1890/13-1369.1.
A forb isn't a species of plant.
[edit]This sentence could use some adjustment:
"A key plant species that reside within mesic habitats is the Forb which provides a strong source of food for many species within these habitats. This plant provides food for many avian species but mostly for the Ruffed Grouse.[3]"
Forbs are a type of plant (herbaceous but not grasslike), not a species. There are many species that are considered forbs. Spifferella (talk) 02:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)