Talk:Dark earth

Confusing, Unclear, Incomprehensible, Very Hard to Understand

This article has been tagged for improvement. Editors are invited to list below the specific deficiencies that are Confusing, Unclear, Incomprehensible, or otherwise Very Hard to Understand. Once these are identified, the areas that need work can be addressed and the tags removed. -- Paleorthid (talk) 21:10, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Hey @Dinkytown: I am starting to get the hang of this. @Richard Keatinge: edits subsequent to Dink's tag have increased comprehensibility. Dink: The Londinium bit on dark earth needs to be rewritten. -- Paleorthid (talk) 03:28, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Paleorthid for your useful stimulus. I've had another go. (This article has been on my To Do list for ages, but never quite got to the top.) I think it's a lot more comprehensible, but that rather shows up the dismal shortage of referencing. I've read a moderate amount about the subject, but some time ago now and I can't lay my hand on any of the references. Richard Keatinge (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Charred material section, reference to London clay

I am removing the following isolated sentence from the Charred material section:

London's soil, London Clay, is naturally very impermeable and unsuitable for agriculture without improvement.

The sentence did not suggest that the necessary improvement was effected by adding charred material, so it was not relevant as it stood. The cited reference did attest to the impermeability and difficulty of London clay, but it did not (on the page cited, at least) mention improvement by adding charred material.--Frans Fowler (talk) 22:39, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

References