Talk:Phloeodes diabolicus

Diabolical ironclad beetle

Diabolical ironclad beetle redirects here. Should this common/popular name not be mentioned in the article?--Nø (talk) 16:39, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

 Done 2606:A000:1126:28D:6D82:1150:3AC7:E5B0 (talk) 07:26, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Better photo, please

...The one in the article looks like one that didn't survive being run over by a car. There are plenty of photos on the net -- surely there is one that is royalty-free. 2606:A000:1126:28D:6D82:1150:3AC7:E5B0 (talk) 06:58, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

I was asked to evaluate this article and may be editing it to address my concerns listed below.

This article is well written for what it includes but seems to be missing a few relevant sections.

The lead section concisely summarizes the information in the article and introduces the topic, including links to other relevant articles. The tone is neutral and neither too concise nor too detailed. However, the lead section includes dietary and habitat information not found in the article that should be expanded upon in its own section. The content is relevant and up to date but overrepresents the bioengineering perspective on this beetle as it has no other sections than the shell structure and proceeding commentary on the strength this provides. The shell structure section does not mention that the structure found was used to engineer highly strong and ductile metal alloys with a similar micro-structure to their shells, which could either be the last paragraph of that section or be used to start a new section about the use of this insect in material science. There are underutilized sources that do describe the lifecycle, range, and reclassification of this beetle from Nosoderma diabolicum to Phloeodes diabolicus. Thus portions of the content and sources are underdeveloped. The organization and writing quality are clear. The article includes helpful supporting images of the insect but could be improved with a diagram of the insect's shell structure in that section. One of the images is missing a source and the other is uncaptioned, so that aspect of the article could be improved. The article is rated as start-class and has little in the talk page, while it overall feels incomplete due to the lack of sections for historical taxonomy, uses in material science, and lifecycle information. CrimsonJF (talk) 21:57, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Honors Topics Bio Sci

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 April 2024 and 7 June 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): CrimsonJF (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Xinyuy22, Jdgoffard.

— Assignment last updated by CrimsonJF (talk) 00:15, 9 May 2024 (UTC)

I edited the article to include sections on ecological role and taxonomic history

I edited the article to include sections with all the information in the lead and more information on life history of this beetle. I also added a section focusing on the taxonomic history of this beetle to clarify it's synonymous names and which years it used which names or was considered a member of which genus or family so that further research would be easier. CrimsonJF (talk) 21:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Tone & Flow

I just edited this article to address some glaring issues with organization, tone, and syntax, but I think I just scratched the surface. The "Shell structure" section may need to just be completely overhauled because of how choppy it feels (I'm wondering if each paragraph was just paraphrased from a different source, haha). I'll undoubtedly get back to this myself at some point, but I'm tagging it for copyedits for now. Scientia Insectorum (talk) 05:58, 9 September 2024 (UTC)