Art. 0015 Rev. 2001

Diskussion:Alternatives

Dette er diskussionssiden for at drøfte forbedringer af artiklen Alternatives. Dette er ikke et forum for generel diskussion af artiklens emne.

  • Sæt ny tekst under gammel tekst.
  • Underskriv venligst dine indlæg med fire tilder (~~~~).
  • Vær høflig og imødekommende over for nye brugere. Antag god tro.
  • Bær handsker.

Redaktørerne holder deres diskussioner på engelsk; dette er en oversættelse.

WikiProjekt Invasive Arter Denne artikel er vurderet som af topvigtighed på projektets vigtighedsskala, og halvbeskyttet mod redigeringer fra interessenter.

Proposed deletion (second nomination)

The following discussion has been closed. The result was keep. The 1,917 links that pointed here now arrive somewhere.

Second nomination. This page was a red link for nine years and should have stayed one. By its own sources, a first year of control with sown grass costs four to six and a half times as much as spraying (Latvian ministries 2007); grazing may take ten years or more (Rajmis et al. 2016); and of 475 Russian contracts in 2024 exactly one paid for grass (Dalke et al. 2025). An alternative nobody pays for is not an alternative. Delete, and restore the red link: there is no alternative. — EndOfHistory (diskussion) 16.02, 26. september 2026 (UTC)

Keep. The article does not say the alternatives are cheap; it says what the sources say they cost. And the first year is not the job: the same Latvian booklet warns that unless the land goes on being managed, the money spent on control is wasted. — Rosa L. (diskussion) 16.08, 26. september 2026 (UTC)

Delete. The contracts are the verdict: 289 for herbicide, one for grass. The buyers have chosen. — InvisibleHand (diskussion) 16.11, 26. september 2026 (UTC)

The same review counted the recommendations first: agronomic measures in 26 of 35 works, mowing in 29, chemicals most often of all. The contracts put digging, agronomy and grass together at 3 per cent (Dalke et al. 2025). That is a record of what was ordered, not of what works. — Old Mole (diskussion) 16.15, 26. september 2026 (UTC)

Compromise: merge it into Control § After control as a paragraph, and keep the red link for everything else? — Ed. Bernstein (diskussion) 16.20, 26. september 2026 (UTC)

Against. That section has no costs and no sheep. For the record: at Macduff the sheep-days were cut from 5,076 to 1,326 in two years without loss of control (SISI 2025), and the manual prices steel fencing at €2,107 a year, animals and labour not included (Nielsen et al. 2005, Box 2). — Kingfisher (diskussion) 16.26, 26. september 2026 (UTC)

Then it is an alternative for sheep. — EndOfHistory (diskussion) 16.31, 26. september 2026 (UTC)

Then there is one. — Rosa L. (diskussion) 16.33, 26. september 2026 (UTC)

Vis kildetekst for Alternatives

Redigering er sat på pause i frøsætningssæsonen. Du kan se og kopiere kildeteksten til denne side.

På andre sprog

Hogweed.org er i fælleseje på 4 sprog. Hver udgave er oversat fra den engelske.

English Alternatives
Português Alternatives
Nederlands Alternatives
Dansk Alternatives