emi-protected edit request on 28 April 2014

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to
no to reactivate your request.

It must contain simplest word that can be understand by student.

41.136.73.64 (talk) 17:08, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

There is an easier article about wood at the Simple English Wikipedia. Does that
help you? Tdslk (talk) 17:50, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

File:16 wood samples.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:16 wood
samples.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on November 15, 2017. You can
view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2017-11-15. If this article needs any
attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its
appearance on the Main Page. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 05:24, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Picture of the day

Wood
A collection of sixteen wood samples, from left to right, top to bottom:

1. Pinus sylvestris (Pine)

2. Picea abies (Spruce)
3. Larix decidua (Larch)
4. Juniperus communis (Juniper)
5. Populus tremula (Aspen)
6. Carpinus betulus (Hornbeam)
7. Betula pubescens (Birch)
8. Alnus glutinosa (Alder)
9. Fagus sylvatica (Beech)
10. Quercus robur (Oak)
11. Ulmus glabra (Elm)
12. Prunus avium (Cherry)
13. Pyrus communis (Pear)
14. Acer platanoides (Maple)
15. Tilia cordata (Linden)
16. Fraxinus excelsior (Ash)
Photograph: Anonimski
Archive – More featured pictures...
External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Wood. Please take a moment to review my
edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page
altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the
following changes:

Added archive
https://web.archive.org/web/20160527073656/http://www.woodinculture.fi/en/ to
http://www.woodinculture.fi/en/
Added archive
https://web.archive.org/web/20110414041302/http://www.apawood.org/level_b.cfm?
content=prd_main to http://www.apawood.org/level_b.cfm?content=prd_main

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the
template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links
modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by
InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page
notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below.
Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page
sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass
systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template
{{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot,
you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix
them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:42, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Carbohydrate foam listed at Redirects for discussion

Information.svg

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Carbohydrate foam.
Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. signed,
Rosguill talk 20:30, 28 May 2019 (UTC)

Heartwood sentence doesn't make much sense to me...

"Some uncertainty exists as to whether the wood dies during heartwood formation, as
it can still chemically react to decay organisms, but only once." What exactly does
this sentence mean? When organisms decay wood, isn't it usually already dead? How
would a piece of wood react to a decay organism multiple times? Maybe I'm just not
enough of a wood expert, but could someone let me know if this does make proper
sense. TheSpoonKing (talk) 03:15, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Structure: Call for citation unnecessary

At the end of the fourth paragraph of the section on Wood Structure, there is a
call for a source of the information. The sentence in question is: These fibers are
the elements which give strength and toughness to wood, while the vessels are a
source of weakness. I don't see why a source needs to be cited for this statement.
Not only is the reason for this intuitively obvious, but also it is explained in
several ways in the rest of the article. The vessels are a source of weakness
because they are open tubes. The more empty space, the less solid the structure;
the less solid the structure, all other things being equal, the easier it is to
break.

The concept is presented again under the subsection Wood:Structure:In Softwoods:

When examined under a microscope, the cells of dense latewood are seen to be very
thick-walled and with very small cell cavities, while those formed first in the
season have thin walls and large cell cavities. The strength is in the walls, not
the cavities. Hence the greater the proportion of latewood, the greater the density
and strength.

But here there is no call for the citation of a source. I think that's as it should
be. It should also be that way in the introductory paragraph mentioned above. The
request for a citation is distracting and unnecessary. It should