Talk:Calliphora loewi

This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on early 2009. Further details are available here.

Typos

The information is quite concise. I might add a little to each of the paragraph to beef it up some or find a way to group them together. Also, in the first paragraph I would change bluebottle to either blue bottle or blue-bottle. Hopps12714 (talk 14:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the first sentence of the first paragraph "and in the genus Callaphora", i believe you mean "genus Calliphora". Also, in the fourth sentence of the second paragraph "The posterior of the head is concave with 3 to 5 rows of black seat", i believe you meant "setae" instead of "seat". Other than that your article looks good.

Lflores0812 (talk) 22:40, 31 March 2009 (UTCL

Lflores0812- Thank you for bringing those mistakes to our attention.

I was wondering if there were any cases that use this species to determine PMI. I know these are not found in United States, but if it would strengthen the page if you could give at least one example. Other than that, it was very organized and detailed. The history section may lack depth but I understand it is hard to find information for. Good job.Heedeok (talk) 01:01, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction

You might want to make your introduction a little longer. It is supposed to be a summry of your article. Someone gave us this advice for our page, so I thought I would pass it along. But otherwise, your article looks great! Vekrull (talk) 10:52, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Hey guys. Your article is really nice and informative. I just have some formatting suggestions. First off, I think it would be better if the word "Calliphora" was not linked in the scientific name "Calliphora loewi", but rather link it when you say, "in the genus Calliphora." The way it is linked now is a little confusing. Also, instar is linked repeatedly when it really only needs to be done once. Finally, is there some way for you to combine the History section with another section? It just seems a little choppy to me that that section only has one sentence. Otherwise, your article is really great. I hope my comments are helpful. Feel free to take a look at our article, Lucilia mexicana, and let us know what you think! Simonthelion (talk) 19:31, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean by the confusion with Calliphora. I fixed the excess links, but I will leave the history section edit to the group member who wrote it to tweak. Thanks for your input.--Jdarnell (talk) 15:27, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Editing

I really enjoyed this article; it was very detailed and informative. I did however find a few errors in the Forensic section. The first sentence should be in present tense and maybe be worded like, “Forensic entomology is the study of arthropods and their connection to the courts of law.” instead of “Forensic entomology is the study of arthropods as they pertain, used, or connected to the courts of law.” The current definition it a bit unclear. Also "blowflies" in the Forensic and Research sections needs to be changed to "blow flies" or "blow-flies". Other than that it looks great.DianaW10 (talk) 21:01, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]