Talk:Formiscurra indicus
 | A fact from Formiscurra indicus appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 July 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | It is requested that a photograph of a female specimen be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Why so long undescribed?
[edit]Since the insect has been collected at so many sites, is there any published suggestion whyit eluded discovery so long?--Wetman (talk) 21:39, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
- No published suggestion but I know the second author of the species and several of the original collectors of the early specimens personally. Entomologists working outside of the Victorian collection hubs (the Natural History Museum, Smithsonian, AMNH and similar other collections such as those in France) are severely handicapped in that they never can quite tell if something they see has already been described and it takes a lot of time to even figure out the specialists in a particular group (and make contact, and all these that have become enormously easier in the Internet era). The second author is an expert on the Oriental Cicadellidae and although he held specimens of related groups, it takes a specialist on the group (the first author in this case) to actually put things in perspective, describe the new species using group-specific terminology and so on. Shyamal (talk) 10:22, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Female photo?
[edit]I think that this article could probably benefit from a photo of a female of the species. One of its main traits is that the males mimic ants and the females do not. This is not very well shown the the article currently, which has three photos of males and none of females. Zell Faze (talk) 22:55, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
- I agree with that. And regarding Wetman's question "why was this species undiscovered for so long?" I would hazard the guess that collectors did not realize that this was a single species, and were looking for females that matched the males, and vice versa, before formally publishing a description. I think that is a marvellous question. 72.177.123.145 (talk) 00:16, 2 July 2013 (UTC)Eric
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Formiscurra. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141020202209/http://ag.udel.edu/delpha/7963.pdf to http://ag.udel.edu/delpha/7963.pdf
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) 02:37, 3 January 2017 (UTC)