Talk:Conoppia palmicinctum

Disputed

Used File:Haeckel Leiosoma palmicinctum.jpg, which is actually the mite Tereticepheus palmicinctum. I cannot find a scholarly source claiming L. palmicinctum to be a weevil.

Leiosoma Stephens, 1829 does in fact seem to be a genus of weevils (and seeing who edited Anthribidae, I presume it's correctly placed there). However, Nomenclator Zoologicus seems to imply it's a nomen nudum - but gives no replacement name. That nonwithstanding, Leiosoma Nicolet, 1855 is a junior homonym and was renamed Liacarus. Of course, not all species lumped there are now in Liacarus.

I have outcommented the larval description, which apparently refers to the mite. The rest of the article seems a copy-paste from some unspecified source, by the language of it I'd guess around 1900. Or perhaps several sources, since the text switches between descriptions of a beetle and descriptions of T. palmicinctum.

I have no idea what's going on here. Dysmorodrepanis (talk) 19:38, 23 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I created this article like a a year and a half ago, when I was still a noob, and I really don't remember what happened. Bugboy52.4 | =-= 01:34, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]