Talk:Foraging

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 September 2021 and 3 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Casually Anonymous. Peer reviewers: Koafve, Coffeebeangirl, GracePhiri3750.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[Untitled][edit]

Hi

I've just made a start on marginal value theorem. Anyone want to improve it?

Robinh 13:20, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Linkspam?[edit]

Any reason why the link "Foraging and the Pet Parrot" should be here? Looks to me like a cheap excuse for a link to a pet shop.. --Sascha.leib 12:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed and removed. Richard001 03:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

research report[edit]

lots of people may use this article for reports. i suggest expanding it. Roxy:Pkid (talk) 02:27, 11 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

foraging theory?[edit]

I came to this page from a link about Sherman's march to the sea, shouldn't this be under foraging theory with this article being about hunter-gatherers or military foraging or both?

Foraged foods[edit]

I was looking for info on what people generally forage for, split into different countries where necessary. In Britain, typicals include various mushrooms, elderberry, blackberry, hawthorn, chestnut. Nettles are also popular in Ireland.

82.23.45.88 (talk) 21:33, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neither article makes much, if any, reference to the content of the other. I would suggest the content at Risk Sensitive Foraging Models belongs in Foraging until such time as that article is of excessive length. Pontificalibus (talk) 10:21, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pontificalibus: Go ahead and do it, no one has objected. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:23, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article seems a bit too long to merge without much overlapping content. Seraphim System (talk) 18:22, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Seraphim System; and the topic is independently notable and reliably cited. I think it's time to close this now. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:01, 25 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]