Talk:Staurois tuberilinguis

Wiki Education assignment: Behavioral Ecology 2022

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): B1deng (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Lvanzen3, Jsun2148, I Bet on Losing Frogs, Darreciel.

— Assignment last updated by CalJS (talk) 21:05, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

I simplified some language to remove excessive scientific jargon and corrected the case of some subheadings to match Wikipedia's style guide. I also added a description of foot-flagging, which was missing, and removed an unnecessary subheading in the Conservation section, since the topic was the only thing discussed in that section.I Bet on Losing Frogs (talk) 21:34, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review comment

{{This is a very interesting frog. I also found out that American bullfrog use posture as their "body language" to communicate, which is really cool. But I also have a few questions do with the frogs. In the introduction, it says that Staurois tuberilinguis combines acoustic calls with visual display signals, which is well-known as the multi-modal system of communication. Just for curiosity, as mentioned in the behavior section, it seems more likely to be switching between the two models instead of combining the signals. I am not sure if that’s just the extreme case that two models separate or if they really just switch between the two mechanisms. This is a really short page, so I assume it is a brand new Wikipedia page that our classmate did on his/her own. But the categories are a little bit less than enough. I would expect more on reproduction, physiology and some other key information to be introduced. And for the description section, maybe it’s better to put a line introducing a more general appearance of this frog. In the adult section, it only indicates the size and some body parts' specificity rather than any broad picture of the frog’s color. And I personally would say that ontogenetic development should be categorized into the Reproduction and life cycle section. Moreover, the diet itself can be a section alone, so I changed the arrangement of the page. The mating section says they will release “a mating call” after getting sexually mature. Is it just one single calling? I also changed the wording of some sentences.Darreciel (talk) 07:59, 16 November 2022 (UTC)}}

Peer Review

Lead is super well written. Added a hyperlink for Ranidae.

A bit confused by the Tadpole morphology bit… Why are you writing about the Staurois parvus tadpole? I’d reword to something like “The tadpoles of S. tuberilinguis and S. parvus are nearly indistinguishable, possessing… blah blah blah… The only visible difference between tadpoles of the two species is various white isolated acini on the body and tail of S. tuberilinguis.” Also, what is “acini”?

Okay I’m slightly more confused now. The Taxobox says that this article is about S. tuberilinguis, but the text is almost exclusively about S. parvus. Is this article considering them as the same species? Or is this a mistype? If this article is really about S. parvus, I think you should just make that a separate article.

Also, if you reference the scientific name at the top you don’t need to rewrite the whole genus name, you can shorten it to S. parvus or S. tuberilinguis. I’ll fix this as I go.

Wording for Habitat and distribution is great! You’re really good as summarizing important information without it getting too wordy or too choppy.

Confused by the arrow symbol under Life cycle.

Really good description of the foot-flagging displays.

Can’t emphasize enough how good the writing in this article is! Seriously, you did an amazing job with that. Good breadth of information too. I would make sure to clarify whether this article is about S. parvus or S. tuberilinguis. If it really is all about S. parvus, I would maybe make this all into a new article. Other than that I don't really have any other edits. Lvanzen3 (talk) 21:14, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review

Some grammar was changed to create a more formal tone. For example, the phrase “minus the fact” was removed from the “Description” section.

There is no need to add the fact that the two related species are from the Staurois because that is already implicit in the name. Thus, I deleted the portion of the sentence after the hyphen.

I added photos of the species throughout the Wikipedia page.

Citations should be added to the end of sentences. I’m not sure what studies are being references, but regardless, they require references.

There are also text inconsistences when using synonymous names. When synonymous names were used in the text, I changed them back to the one most referenced throughout the article (S. tuberilinguis).

I moved the description of the frog being “diurnal and crepuscular” to the lead section (taking it out of the “Habitat and distribution section.” I thought these descriptions needed less elaboration and made more sense in an introduction rather than a specific section of the Wikipeida page.

Overall, I’m a little confused as to whether this article was on Staurois tuberilinguis or Staurois parvus. The two seem to be interchangeable, and that is a little confusing for the clarity of the article. Other than that, the piece is well written and very clear! Jsun2148 (talk) 00:14, 18 November 2022 (UTC)