Category talk:Wood

Forestry Category‑class

	This category is within the scope of WikiProject Forestry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the profession and science of forestry 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.ForestryWikipedia:WikiProject ForestryTemplate:WikiProject ForestryForestry articles
Category	This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Plants Category‑class

	Plants portal This category is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Category	This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Woodworking NA‑class (inactive)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Woodworking, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.WoodworkingWikipedia:WikiProject WoodworkingTemplate:WikiProject WoodworkingWoodworking articles
NA	This article has been rated as NA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Untitled[edit]

This category is for wood related articles. The only trees that should be included are those that are very important as a source of lumber or trees s that are notable as a source oof wood.

Comment[edit]

What is wood used for?

And

Why is it important that we have wood?

Why are trees placed in this category?[edit]

It does not make sense to have trees listed under this category. Perhaps important trees used for plantation forests can be listed but not any old tree. Alan Liefting 17:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If all trees are placed in this category we will not be able to see the wood for the trees! Alan Liefting 17:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree, it seems pointless to me to include any trees here at all, the category should be kept for directly wood-associated articles, like burl, log, particle board, wood veneer, etc. - MPF 12:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is understandable that the more notable trees used for wood are included here. I notice the jarrah was reverted after I removed the wood category. Alan Liefting 20:49, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wood, timber, trees[edit]

There is a strong and important distinction made in the timber industry and the wood craft world between timber, an industrial raw material used in large scale industrial processes (paper etc.) and in construction, and wood, a product used to manufacture small items, often on a craft basis. The world wide timber industry does not include that much wood, the wood trade is international but involves small quantities of material (ebonies, sandalwood, etc.) I think there needs to be two categories. Trees in wikipedia are listed by botanical name usually, in the pages concerning a taxa of trees there is often mention made of what timber or wood is provided by that type of tree. If we do not include trees in this category page, then should all wood types have their own wikipedia pages, that then links to here? Wood is often referred to by a tree name, e.g. pine, cypress, ebony, oak, redgum, sheoak and so on. If we do not link wood/tree to here what is a category page about wood about, everything but the actual woods? I support the listing of woods here, but would also like to see a distinction between timber and wood treesBrunswicknic (talk) 17:27, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]