Talk:Lymantria dispar in the United States

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States C‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Lepidoptera C‑class Low‑importance

	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.LepidopteraWikipedia:WikiProject LepidopteraTemplate:WikiProject LepidopteraLepidoptera articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Environment C‑class Low‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Ecology C‑class Low‑importance

	Ecology portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ecology, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve ecology-related articles.EcologyWikipedia:WikiProject EcologyTemplate:WikiProject EcologyEcology articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Should I remove unreferenced instructional text or convert it?

Much of the latter half of this article seems to be instructional text. Should I remove this completely or convert to another format? Most of it seems to be unreferenced. I've already converted some of it. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 15:50, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done; text removed as part of copy-edit. Baffle gab1978 (talk) 16:21, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gypsy moths in the United States. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 20:25, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 March 2022

It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

– Per the official changing of the common name as adopted in March 2022. HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 15:28, 8 March 2022 (UTC) HapHaxion _{(talk / contribs)} 15:28, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "official" list of common names for insects. Spongy moth is just the name that the Entomological Society of America put on their common name list, a list almost nobody knew existed until this gypsy moth renaming made the news. If you really want "official," the Canadian government decided it is the LDD moth, the initials for the subspecies name.

In New Zealand, it is called the gypsy moth. I'm curious why the New Zealand page should be changed to a name not used in New Zealand. Bigwhitmer (talk) 19:37, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Since I'm supposed to base arguments on article title policy, I'll quote it: "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers the name that is most commonly used."

Based on that, neither article should be renamed. Gypsy moth will be the commonly used name for the foreseeable future. Bigwhitmer (talk) 21:44, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per WP:COMMONNAME, it will likely take a long time, if ever, for people to stop calling them "gypsy moths". ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:53, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]