Talk:Pruning shears

Merge
The reason for a merge is that Americans don't use the word secateurs, but call them loppers. So I suggest we put all these terms and varied meanings on this one page, with explanations of usage. I'll find out what Australians call the different tools. JackyR | Talk 09:35, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * We called them secateurs in Australia too.70.189.154.46 (talk) 02:23, 12 July 2009 (UTC)


 * No, apparently the American who posted on Talk:Secateurs was just confused. So scrub that idea. :-) JackyR | Talk 17:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I asked another American here and when I described secateurs, he called them small pruning shears, and when I described loppers, he called them large pruning shears. I would call the large tool branch cutters, but Home Depot and Lowes call them loppers.  (Though they also stock "bypass pruners" which look like secateurs.)  I think secateurs should be merged here; loppers are at least distinctly two-handed. -- Beland (talk) 22:24, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi -- I'm American and I've never heard the term "choinstein (for anything, including shears of any sort)." I'm pretty sure this is vandalism but before I delete I wanted to doublecheck. Sugarbat (talk) 20:47, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Actually, now I'm wondering why this article says that pruning shears have been "superceded" by secateurs. -- Beland (talk) 22:27, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, M-W says "secateurs" is British for "pruning shears", so I implemented the merge and removed the that confusing unreferenced passage. -- Beland (talk) 22:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Layout
Layout needs work. Photos disrupting See also and other section lines. Not my skill. Help? Duff (talk) 19:54, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Three Types
The statement that there are three types: anvil, bypass and parrot beak is incorrect. There are at least four: Anvil, Bypass, Double-blade and the vintage-style parrot-beak, and probably others. The parrot beak does not have two concave blades. One blade is concave, the other convex at the back and concave at the front. It is also unfair to say they are only any good for thin stems. I find them to be a fantastic all-rounder and especially good for roses, getting through stems the others I have give up on. 151.170.240.200 (talk) 11:11, 8 April 2021 (UTC)