lflage/wiki-talks huggingface dataset:
Talk:Pygidicranidae

message: "have not been planed into any of the subfamilies" doesn't look right to me. "have not been planned into any of the subfamilies" might be what was intended. But would "have not been allocated to any of the subfamilies" be more apt? ϢereSpielChequers 10:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: corrected to placed.--Wetman (talk) 14:28, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks ϢereSpielChequers 17:59, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: planed

message: The entomologist "Bolivar" is not a household name like Dante or Shakespeare, though the editors of this article seem to be on familiar terms. Ignacio Bolivar has been identified and linked.
But:
*pygidicranids do not have any ocelli Are they blind, then?
*a dense covering of setae: Wikipedia informs me that "Setae in entomology are often called hairs or chaetae." Edited to read "a dense covering of bristly hairs (setae)". See how that's more reader-friendly? Would a link to chaetae be better?
*cerci: Edited to read "pair of cerci at the end of the abdomen", See how that subtly explains what cerci are? Friendlier.
*and the head is broad, with antennomeres four five and six that are not transverse. Edited, eliminating and in the sense of "plus also another thing",  to read "The head is broad, with the fourth, fifth and sixth antenna segments (antennomeres) that are not transverse." The sentence remains impenetrable: what does "not transverse" signify in an antenna segment, which is what antennomere means, yes?
*equally sized venteral cervical sclerites Ventral is spelled ventral if that's what's intended, but what are cervical sclerites, the average reader will ask?--Wetman (talk) 14:29, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Intentional jargon
Talk:Red-veined darter

message: A term I was not familiar with is used in this article.  To refer to the general impression of a species, birders and twitchers say jizz.  It is in this article, at the bottom of the identification section.  Now, with possible misunderstandings aside, the term seems inappropriate because it is terminology used outside the field of entomology.  It is not relevant to this page and is more appropriate in a bird watching article.  I say the term be changed to "gestalt image" if not removed altogether. Sigil VII (talk) 14:26, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of birdwatching terms in Entomology articles? 

message: Is it poisonous,and or can it be found in North America. 38.141.27.169 (talk) 18:59, 4 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questions
Talk:Redlichia takooensis

message: W. T. Zhang, Y. H. Lu, Z. L. Zhu, Y. Y. Qian, H. L. Lin, Z. Zhou, S. Zhang and J. L. Yuan. 1980. Cambrian trilobite faunas of southwestern China. Palaeontologia Sinica, new series B 16:1-497 [W. Kiessling/U. Merkel]
It appears that Lu,1950 established this species already in the Genus Redlichia. So it is Redlichia takooensis Lu, 1950 and not Redlichia takooensis (Lu, 1950).
--93.224.79.100 (talk) 07:13, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference is missing:
Talk:Redlichiina

message: In other fossil articles, its status as a fossil is not in the taxobox. I see no reason as to why this article should be any different. Mark t young (talk) 16:42, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In other fossil articles about a particular species, its status as a fossil is, or should be, in the taxobox. Only individual species are or are not fossils. If other articles about a particular species does not have a conservation status, then those articles should be changed, not this one. PAR (talk) 20:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: "Fossil" is not an IUCN conservation status. They are "Extinct", "Extinct in the Wild", "Critically Endangered", "Endangered", "Vulnerable", "Threatened", "Conservation Dependent", "Near Threatened", and "Least Concern". Wikipedia:Taxobox_usage#Conservation_status clearly states: "Conservation status may optionally be included; you can search the IUCN's database of threatened species to find the conservation status of many organisms. It is included via the status argument, which takes a code or template. It is not appropriate for prehistoric organisms - the fossil_range parameter may be a more sensible option." Firsfron of Ronchester 09:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Regarding conservation status
Talk:Rhaphidophoridae

message: I remember reading on this wiki that these were called 'Jackal Spider Crabs', or something similar.  Anyone know what happened to that?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.218.85.222 (talk) 18:01, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jackal Spider Crab 

message: I think this article would be much better without so many pictures :-/
Maybe not have the pictures on the page, but a link to click on if one wanted to look at a picture.  These things CREEP me out, and probably lots of other people.  I'd love to read an article on ANY insect, even if they creep me out...if I didn't have to look at them.  The article says that these insects are completely harmless; that puts my mind at ease, but I'd rather not have them staring me in the face while I find that out...
Just saying  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.235.98.26 (talk) 13:46, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: If it has wings, then you have misidentified it, and it is something in a different family. Is this image available online for viewing? Dyanega (talk) 22:03, 8 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pictures 

message: I'm from Virginia, and we've always called them "cricket spiders" or "jumping spiders". From a distance, they look like spiders, but then they jump at you like a cricket when you try to squash them, which makes you scream in abject terror.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.110.223.22 (talk) 03:01, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: We had them when I lived in northern Georgia... at least something that looked like them... and I was told that they were called "latrine bugs." PurpleChez (talk) 20:17, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names 

message: An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Jumpy bugs. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so.  Plantdrew (talk) 17:15, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jumpy bugs listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Rhizocephala

message: I don't necessarily have the time to do all this, but I read through some of the main reference,, and a lot of the details in this article are either nonexistent in the reference, are oversimplifications, or are misinterpretations by the author. The reference is only a few pages long, so this shouldn't be too big a problem to fix.174.25.204.125 (talk) 18:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accuracy of the article?
Talk:Rhodnius

message: Hello,
I think this article should be reclassified to a higher importance level since Rhodnius insects are vectors for Chagas disease. Chagas disease is relatively not well known despite being widespread, and deadly. Getting more information about Rhodnius is important for anybody doing preliminary research into these vectors.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.180.247.113 (talk) 19:57, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Rhopalosomatidae

message: What is the current position of this one from India ? C. T. Brues (1926) Note on the Hymenopterous Family Rhopalosomatidae.
Psyche 33:18-19, 1926. http://psyche.entclub.org/33/33-018.html ? Shyamal (talk) 09:24, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Strike that. Found it is Paniscomima abnormis from Sri Lanka. Shyamal (talk) 09:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Hymenochimaera'' 
Talk:Mandhatri

message: Going by https://books.google.co.in/books?id=PwsYAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA197&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false , Mandhata (which is citation-less) should be merged into Mandhatri (which has a couple of citations). Dowson prefers Mandhatri over Mandhata and the provided etymology is for the former. Cpt.a.haddock (talk) (please ping when replying) 17:27, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Support - both seems to be about the same character. -- Pankaj Jain Capankajsmilyo (talk · contribs · count) 18:44, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merge with [[King Mandhata]]
Talk:Orgyia antiqua

message: I added that because of comments made on the science reference desk to the effect that it should be established whether or not this speices is poisonous. \sim Lenoxus " * " 18:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expert template 

message: I was on vacation in Niagara falls and by chance I see a caterpillar very similar to the larval state of this species, but according to the article is native to Europe, so is it possible its an invasive species to Northern America or not? -- Sion8 (talk) 18:00, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Is it normal to see this in Ontario?
Talk:Saddleback caterpillar

message: Are the resulting moths from this species also in possession of urticating hairs or scales?  Murakumo-Elite (talk) 07:05, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  adult form risks, 

message: the last part of this article seems more instructional than encyclopedic... 94.195.230.149 (talk) 20:48, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  instructional? 

message: This is the strangest-looking animal you will see outside the depths of the ocean. Close up, the white-rimmed green area looks like a coat that one would put on a dog, except that this one is on a caterpillar. My wife was stung by one today, and we identified it by Googling images for 'stinging caterpillar'. Believe it or not, this strange creature was the first image that came up. She retrieved the individual that had stung her, and we still have a hard time believing it's not some sort of extraterrestrial/artificial creature. That "coat" is REALLY strange. Lou Sander (talk) 05:27, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: We have two of them in our garden, feeding on gladiolus leaves. You can't even see them move. Lou Sander (talk) 01:41, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Otherworldly creature
Talk:Salt Creek tiger beetle

message: I'm a student at WashU, and as part of the Behavioral Ecology 2024 Wiki Education Assignment, I wanted to give you some feedback on the Wikipedia page. I've sent in a Google document with edits regarding this article to the Wiki assignment, but overall my suggestions centered around rearranging some paragraphs and considering adding more information to sections to make them flow better and leave the reader with fewer questions after.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikakipnisuser (talk • contribs) 16:13, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feedback for Wikipedia assignment 

message: — Assignment last updated by Cvj.005 (talk) 21:07, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Behavioral Ecology 2024

message: The following comment is left for a classmate for an assignment: This article is very well-written! I divided, renamed, and rearranged some sections to help with reader clarity ( social behavior, taxonomy, etc). The biggest thing that needs to be fixed is that citations are needed for every paraphrased sentence/sentence that uses a source. Bomapoodle (talk) 14:42, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Feedback for Author
Talk:Saturniidae

message: For the species list on this page, I wanted to reorganize it such that first comes the binomial name with a link, and then to the right have the common name. It looks very disorganized and confusing currently since about half of them don't have common names. Any dissents or suggestions?--Kugamazog 08:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Species list 

message: What do they eat? --46.36.168.55 (talk) 20:37, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Guestion about nutrition 

message: The redirect Silk moths has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.   Jay 💬 06:02, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Silk moths]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]
Talk:Scarlet lily beetle

message: Spiderayman (talk) 03:54, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

message: I have a high res picture of one of these; it is eating the leaf. Where should I upload it? pixels (talk) 07:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture 

message: My lilies have been infested this year.  Never saw them before.  Results of cool wet season?--Nowa (talk) 13:29, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: 2009 infestation in CT
Talk:Sharpshooter (insect)

message: Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that :File:Oncometopia orbona Kaldari.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on February 28, 2011. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2011-02-28. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng  {chat} 19:05, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:Oncometopia orbona Kaldari.jpg]] to appear as POTD soon
Talk:Pacifastacus fortis

message: The slime coating the rocks? seems unencyclopedic, i'm not sure if the slime the article is talking about is Algae but that would make more since then "slime" if someone knows please add MikelZap (talk) 16:37, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I fixed this, and added more details that I got from another reliable source. Russkang (talk) 18:13, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feeds on... 

message: — Assignment last updated by Rowanfitzgerald (talk) 23:04, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: California Natural History
Talk:Pahlava Kingdom

message: Please do not confuse Palhava and Pahlava. The Palhava ( Pallava) date from the era of the Mahabharata while the Pahlava are Iranian. There is nothing that says they are the same people.
Assuming they are the same is very convenient from some in the "West" to date and post-date the events of the Mahabharata. In the same way one finds that the Yavanas mentioned in the Mahabharata are being referred to as Greeks (Ionians)! Come on guys, this is an encyclopedia and not a fairy tale spinning school class!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.52.53.213 (talk) 10:45, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled
Talk:Parada Kingdom

message: After I went and edited a lot of the copy of the epic from this article, I don't see much left that distinguishes this from the article on Paradas.  I propose that we merge this article into Paradas (or vice-versa, I don't really care which is which, so long as there's only one article).  Since we're talking about an ancient clan, I'm not sure that there's enough of a distinction between Parada-as-people and Parada-as-kingdom to warrant two articles. Please discuss this merger at Talk:Paradas#Merger proposalQwyrxian (talk) 03:40, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal
Talk:Silver-studded blue

message: I think it would be beneficial to clarify in the lead section that the butterfly exhibits sexual dimorphism before jumping into the description. I broke up the description section into adult and larvae. This section still needs a citation, which I had trouble finding. I added information about their mutualism with ants under egg guarding and expanded on the benefit of reduced parental investment under the mutualism section.Felderp (talk) 03:49, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Review

message: This is a UK Biodiversity Action Plan species—GRM 15:04, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Importance rating 

message: Hi, all. Thank you for reviewing my article! These edits are very helpful and I've added citations accordingly. To directly respond to Y.shin's comment about the mating section- in reading the article in question, it is clear that it does indeed reference Plebejus argus, so the citation is valid after looking past the title. I will continue working on the article and contributing relevant, cited information to the page, especially on the topic of life cycle! ClaudiaEE 23:28, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Edits 

message: Overall the article was well-written, and I made edits for formatting and grammar. I italicized the species name in all instances that the scientific name was mentioned and changed the headings to correspond to sentence case as used for Wiki standards. I also added Wiki hyperlinks to other species and terms used. There were two citations that were exactly the same in the reference list, so I fixed the citation to use the same source. 
I think it would be most helpful for this article if the Life Cycle section to be better expanded upon, with at least one section per life cycle stage. The "Life Cycle" also has a sentence referencing "grizzled skippers." If that is another name for the species, it might help to put that in the lead introduction. Also, the "Geographic range" section mentioned that the butterfly experienced a decline in population, so it would be more informative to either briefly explaining why and have the "Habitat Loss" provide details.  Catejiang (talk) 05:14, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Review
Talk:Silverleaf whitefly

message: Someone has been doing some serious screwing around with this article. I remember being here awhile back and it was much better, so I looked through the previous edits. I reinstalled the tax box w/o the image as someone more knowledgeable than I needs to ensure it is the correct species. I also fixed the citation in the text and added the correct reference format (Or did I?) in a new Footnotes section. And there are certainly much better references than that. Mostly the reference is about the broad mite. Also, considering the effect of this species, I believe that it rates much higher then "Low-importance." But I am certainly not an expert on this species. Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 16:43, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Edits

message: I am confused about the identity of the insect described in this article. Though the title is "Silverleaf whitefly" and the B biotype is mentioned several times in the text, the text does not seem to be exclusively about this biotype. I suggest that the text be narrowed down and a separate article be written about B. tabaci or the tobacco whitefly as a whole. This is justified in my view, because the B biotype is quite distinctive from the rest and is much more damaging to crops. I agree with Thomas Fasulo that an article about the B biotype deserves a higher importance rating. Dogo (talk) 21:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. --Bejnar (talk) 19:18, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Identity
Talk:Sitophilus

message: As we know Sitophilus takes birth in rice grain and dies within 35 days.. Does it require water? and if not how come it takes birth? Water is must right.. 
If it does not require water, it may be available in MOON too.. 
We can say that Sitophilus is alien.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.167.224.103 (talk) 10:23, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sitophilus consumes water or not?  

message: The body of the article refers to a single species, and not the entire genus. But, which species? Can we put" "Species in the genus generally..." ?   Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:14, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which species?
Talk:Slipper lobster

message: Scyllarides nodifer is a species common in Florida. It is sometimes called a "shovelnose lobster" instead of slipper lobster.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.235.229.52 (talk) 00:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scyllarides nodifer 

message: I think "sea cicada" is another common name, or at least a common translation from mediterranean languages (most propably by the French as cigales de mer).--92.118.191.48 (talk) 04:17, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sea Cicada 

message: This passing reference is mysterious as it stands. Isn't the "nisto" instar a defining part of the life cycle? M. Ito, The Complete Larval Development of the Scyllarid Lobster, 1990, might be a good reference.--Wetman (talk) 17:03, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Nisto" stage 

message: Their predators are mentioned, but not a word about slipper lobster diet. Possibly it's been edited out, but I find this a common problem on animal pages. Can someone with appropriate knowledge/linkification sort this out, please? Centrepull (talk) 14:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ecology: diet 

message: Evidently (some) German speakers call them Bear Crabs -- Bärenkrebsen. A friend found a machine translation that came up with  "cancer" (evidently through the Zodiac sign of the Crab). So there's another name for them. 35.129.24.61 (talk) 17:06, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  German Term
Talk:Cyclograpsus lavauxi

message: This article has been revised as part of the large-scale clean-up project of a massive copyright infringement on Wikipedia. Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously.
For more information on this situation, which involved a single contributor liberally copying material from print and internet sources into several thousand articles, please see the two administrators' noticeboard discussions of the matter,  here and here, as well as the the cleanup task force subpage. Thank you.  --Geronimo20 (talk) 08:06, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem
Talk:Skateaway

message: The music player in the video is not a "newly released" Sony Walkman.  It looks nothing like a Walkman, and has a radio dial, and no indication of a cassette player. Changing this immediately. --O0drogue0o (talk) 10:09, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Walkman
Talk:Soft-shell crab

message: Soft shell crab is unheard of in Japan.  It does not exist in Japanese sushi.  It only exists in foreign versions of sushi.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.43.88.196 (talk) 04:37, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Seems like a bunch of good data. Still a stub? Daharon (talk) 05:30, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A stub? 

message: The last paragraph of the article reads like a blog or cook book.
 I've reworded it but suggest removing it. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 19:32, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Edit.  Removed paragraph by rolling back changes. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 19:36, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I restored it, because the best food-related articles found throughout wikipedia will discuss the reality of the animal/ingredient. That might sound cookbookish to you but it is also what people come to Wikipedia for. No "sales" involved, and removing the para weakened the value for those looking for info about the soft shell crab, the primary interest in generally being as food, which involves buying and cooking them. I note that you may be in the UK where fresh soft shells aren't available without import. Would you object to an article about kippers including detailed passages about buying, handling and serving them? An entry with The Latin name and a statement that they are popular is not adequate. I did like your first attempt at editing my para though and restored yours, not my first attempt Daharon (talk) 16:30, 7 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing last paragraph