Talk:Utetheisa ornatrix

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Lepidoptera (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lepidoptera, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of butterflies and moths 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Edits[edit]

I am a student contributing to this page for my class, Behavioral Ecology. I just added sections on the courtship, mating system, sexual selection, and parental investment.

kzyoung (talk) 01:53, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I added some information on the behavior of the caterpillars and the mating behavior of the Ornate Moth. --Aliciacanas (talk) 02:45, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

I added a new taxonomy section and added new information to it. NK2015 (talk) 12:10, 17 November 2013 (UTC)

I edited the lead of the article, adding information to more correctly summarize the content of the article. To do so, I combined the previous description portion and added a couple sentences on the sexual selection of the Utetheisa ornatrix moth. In addition, I rearranged most of the content in the lead in an attempt to make the information flow better and follow the structure of Good Articles. I also made some corrections throughout the entire article rearranging sentences and fixing word choice. In addition, I added a new description section and added physical descriptions of each life stage of the moth. Kzyoung (talk) 00:01, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

I changed some headers to more general terms that accurately describe the presented content. I also rearranged some of the content, moving information from the mating to courtship section. In addition, I added some information into the header “Postcopulatory Sexual Seletion,” to make the information more complete. In addition, I made some grammatical changes.

kzyoung (talk) 04:35, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I think this article is well written and there is a lot of good information on behavior. I think the next step would be to add in more general information on the moth is order to broaden the scope of the article. I decided to create a Description heading along with a Distribution heading in order to organize some of that information a bit better. I also noticed feel like the moth's aposematic coloration could be discussed along with possible mimics.Maximilianzhang (talk) 22:36, 31 October 2013 (UTC)


I edited grammar and rearranged a couple of sentences in the Courtship section. I also added some more information underneath the Parental Investment section. Overall though, this article seems informative and easy to read for the average wikipedia user. NK2015 (talk) 23:10, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Just saw the new edits that user Aliciacanas put on the Wikipedia page--I like the new sections/rearrangement of the entire Wikipedia piece. However, there were some grammar issues in the newest two sections, so I corrected those. NK2015 (talk) 23:33, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

The article looks good and is well written. I made a few changes in the wording. I have a few suggestions for areas that need a bit of clarification. In the larval stage, predation section it would be good to define the concept of pod, otherwise it is a little bit unclear. Is the lack of PAs the main cause of mortality only in the larval stage, or throughout the entire life? It would be good to clarify this in the cannibalism paragraph. In the cannibalism paragraph you could explain why there is a lack of selective pressure for kin recognition. Abuatois (talk) 15:48, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Overall, the article looks good! I made a few minor edits and had some questions. I deleted the Larval stages and Adult stages headings because there is some mention of adults in the larval section under predation and the subsequent subheadings did not complement each other in each section (i.e. obviously you couldn't make a matings section for larvae). Under "Cannibalism", I found this sentence particularly confusing: "Larvae may also feed on other larvae that are laden with alkaloids. This is more common since feeding on one single larva is sufficient to compensate for the cannibalistic caterpillar's alkaloid deficiency." Did you mean to say that the larvae are also feeding on larvae of other species? Otherwise, I only fixed a few grammatical and sentence-structure errors. Great work! Morganclem (talk) 16:07, 30 October 2013 (UTC)


Hey I added a few links that could be helpful for the page and also added to the lead section for the page. Overall, the page looks great, but I would recommend trying to find more images of the butterfly throughout its life cycle. Great job overall in making the page. Keep up the good work!Jychoe90 (talk) 07:14, 1 November 2013 (UTC)


I modified the lead to make it work better and fixed some grammatical mistakes throughout the entire article. I also fixed the sources, some of them were doubled and were missing doi numbers. Aliciacanas (talk) 03:24, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I think that your contributions with respect to behavior are very well-written and informative. Furthermore, your section on Taxonomy is informative and concise. I would say that more information is needed on the Description and Distribution sections. Furthermore, the introduction section is off to a great start but may need to be extended. I was given this link upon good article review. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section It is very detailed and lengthy but it lays out exactly what is needed for a good intro section. I feel like of all things that the good article reviewers look for, the intro section is one of the more important aspects. Morganclem (talk) 19:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Good job overall! Since you modified your description section and added the different life stages, I would suggest including some pictures of the specific stages. Other pictures could be added elsewhere such as the mating section in behavior. In addition, if you are looking for more subsections to add, conservation or human impact could be interesting. Wmhua (talk) 2:15, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Good intro section – you summarize the scope of your article well. The distribution section is a little short, so more info here could be helpful. I’ve also found that some other good articles have maps of the organism’s distribution, so this could also be a good addition. Overall, great job! Jenniferreed1510 (talk) 19:58, 21 November 2013 (UTC)



Hey great work on the article so far. I found very few grammar/writing errors, which I've already fixed. Aside from that though, the article is very comprehensive in its exploration on all aspects of behavior. After having seen a lot of these biology/organism-related pages, here are a few things I'd recommend. Right now, you have a lot of big header behavior sections like Predation, Mating, Sexual Selection, and Parental Investment which have the same hierarchical standing as Taxonomy, Distribution, Description. What I have found most logical and successful in other articles is dedicating a big-header section to Life Cycle and Behavior, and then within the section, include the different behaviors as smaller sub-headings. This way, you can "narrate" the course of the organism's life from larvae to adult, interweaving the research-backed phenomena of mate selection, parental investment, etc. I believe this approach makes the well-documented research on this organism much more approachable to the daily Wikipedian who is not as well-versed in science. I don't want to make any unwelcome changes, so if you agree with this advice please go ahead and change it.


Oh, and one last thing: A lot of GA articles I've seen incorporate a section on interactions with humans or if the organism has any cultural/economic/agricultural impact on human societies. If there's anything on it I'd highly recommend adding it as well 20:07, 21 November 2013 (UTC)Jabes808 (talk)

The article looks really good, just a few minor corrections. The introduction section needs citations. The Life cycle descriptions are very short, so could benefit from some more information. I moved the Distribution to be the first section because I thought it would help the article's structure. Also, the article could use more links to other wikipedia pages to help in understanding certain words or topics. I added some links. Also, there needs to be more citations, one citation at the end of the paragraph is not enough. Otherwise, there is a great amount of information on this page, and it looks very good. --Vpandrangi (talk) 20:52, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

I tried to modify the article taking into account all of the comments. I modified the writing in the main body of the article. Since two people wrote the behavior section a lot of the information was repeated or did not flow well, so I tried to merge the information better and deleated information that was repeated. I also added pictures throughout the article.Aliciacanas (talk) 23:41, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

I expanded the lead so that it would better summarize the information on the article. I also expanded on the predation section by clarifying the meaning of pod, rearranging the information so that it would read better, and adding more information on unpalatability. I also added citations throughout the article and fixed grammatical mistakes. Aliciacanas (talk) 09:36, 10 December 2013 (UTC)