Talk:ecological service

ecological service
I don't understand the definition, too complicated for me, but it's probably a service of an ecological nature. Mglovesfun (talk) 18:10, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I tried rewriting the definition, based on the WP entry. — Ungoliant (Falai) 18:51, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. — Ungoliant (Falai) 17:09, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Not sure, if we believe the WP entry it's idiomatic, but they are as prone to mistakes as we are (that is to say, very). Mglovesfun (talk) 18:31, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - I took a class which had a focus on this, but we called it ecosystem services. Maybe that's an American thing. Definitely idiomatic, though. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 22:57, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I suspect this is a separate sense of service dealing with benefits that things in nature provide, spoken of as if they were people actively working to provide them, and not passive things. If so, we need to add that to service and delete this as SOP. Aside from ecological services and ecosystem services, there's environmental services, and probably others. I've also heard someone talking about the services (without a modifier) that trees provide in an urban environment. As to locality: I suspect it came fairly recently from the environmental movement, and has only made inroads into the mainstream in environmental contexts. I suppose it might be specific to US environmentalism, but I have no idea whether it is or not. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:31, 26 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Outcome: RFD keep: no consensus for deletion. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:29, 7 December 2013 (UTC)