Talk:Rhagonycha fulva

Insects Low‑importance

	Insects portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects 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.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Beetles Mid‑importance

	Insects portal Rhagonycha fulva is within the scope of WikiProject Beetles, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to beetles. For more information, visit the project page.BeetlesWikipedia:WikiProject BeetlesTemplate:WikiProject Beetlesbeetle articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I see that someone recently removed an edit which referred to this beetle, Rhagonycha fulva, as the "Hogweed Bonking Beetle" on the grounds that it looked like vandalism. I can assure you that it is known as the Bonking Beetle hereabouts, at least (London Borough of Bromley). This is not the first time that name has been edited out. The name probably deserves a mention somewhere in the article, if not a prominent one. Moremoth (talk) 17:55, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was a name popularised by some NCC entymologists in the 80s, if I recall correctly, and is now in general use across the UK. Stub Mandrel (talk) 06:34, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Common red soldier beetle. 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/20060504215143/http://www.uknature.co.uk/R.Fulva-info.html to http://www.uknature.co.uk/R.fulva-info.html

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) 11:01, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

Plantdrew, about your move: where is the binomial name more commonly used? I've mostly seen them referred to using the vernacular name (though I haven't dug through the scientific literature, only in more accessible places). – Uanfala (talk) 02:13, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Uanfala: Ngrams doesn't pick up "common red soldier beetle" at all. What reliable sources have you seen that don't mention the scientific name? Other vernacular names include "black-tipped soldier beetle", and more colloquially, "bloodsucker beetle" and "hogweed bonking beetle". How would you determine which vernacular name is the most appropriate article title? Plantdrew (talk) 02:41, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We need RS that don't mention the scientific name? But any half-decent entomological text will invariably include it. I do see stuff like this or this (I don't know these places so I won't assume they count as RS) and they prefer the term "common red soldier beetle". How do we generally decide which name is more common though? – Uanfala (talk) 02:53, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]