From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Ecology (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ecology, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve ecology-related articles.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.
WikiProject Geography (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Today's articles for improvement
WikiProject icon This article was selected as Today's article for improvement on 17 June 2013 for a period of one week. WikiProject icon


I think a meadow can also be natural grassland, i.e. neither field (definitions say a field is for agricultural purposes and artificially bounded I think) or a pasture (used for grazing). A meadow would then also be a biotope.

Comments? Erland Lewin 15:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is also (originally?) "a lake that has filled with silt" [1]. If there's an appropriate page on Wikipedia, feel free to add a link. 15:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Hello. Be careful, when discussion scientific definitions! You should not confuse these definitions with your own personal preferences or how words are used in everyday conversations. I cannot see, that there is any reason for broadening the definition of a Meadow. As you said yourself (Erland Lewin), what you talk about is really just grasslands. This article needs to reflect the scientific definitions. when they are described, one can add text on everyday language. RhinoMind (talk) 15:01, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Etymology section[edit]

Surely this is harmless and sourced. It helps explain why in agriculture a meadow is associated with mowing. Indeed I believe the Middle English medwe is cognate with mow. Itsmejudith (talk) 08:14, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Added references[edit]

I added some references, and edited some of the sections a bit. I removed the tag about needing references.

Marla the Mop (talk) 20:57, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Wrong images?[edit]

Some of the images are showing "pastures" rather than meadows. According to the definition there is a difference between the two with Pastures being used as grazing land whilst Meadows are specifically not grazed (usually to provide hay or alternatively for honey production). WDYT about removing the images which do not match the definition? B A Thuriaux (talk) 07:53, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi. I have been engaged a bit in this article. Yes, as described in the text pastures and meadows are usually seen as distinct habitats. However, there is a blurred border between the two categories nonetheless. Some so-called "pastures", are only grazed (ie. the plants are cut by machines or animals) on rare occasions. These kinds of pastures is often considered as meadows, from a habitation POV and the habitat is clearly different from ordinary, regularly grazed pastures. I agree this can be quite confusing, but categorization is sometimes a confusing task, with no clear-cut (no pun intended!) answer.
So why am I mentioning all this? Because it is important when considering which images to keep and which images to exchange. First of all, I hope someone will write more about what defines a meadow, from a habitation POV of course. Its important.
RhinoMind (talk) 18:52, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

UK bias/centralism[edit]

This article is about a geographical/ecological subject that both isn't unique to the UK or even that common in the UK. While regional definitions and such may be beneficial if put in their own categories, making this page primarly a UK-centric page is outright bias. There are more hay fields in the United States than in Britain and if an American made this page as slanted towards America as it is towards the UK, then their edits would've been deleted and they probably would've been banned for not being neutral.

This UK bias is common in too many articles and it needs to be fixed. The UK is an irrelevant has-been country of history and not the gatekeeper of the English language or western knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:36, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

The rant above doesn't make sense once investigated. Most of the article is about meadows in general (as it should be). There is only a single paragraph in the article that focuses on the UK (in the Agriculture section). It was probably written by a contributor who knew something about UK meadows and not so much about meadows elsewhere. Nothing is stopping anyone anywhere else in the world from adding info about meadows in other regions, as indeed various people already have in all sections of the article. If you think non-UK meadows need more coverage here (and hey, that'd be great), then you should consider writing it. That's the nature of a crowdsourced encyclopedia. — ¾-10 21:31, 1 October 2015 (UTC)