Talk:Timema

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Timema/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Atomician (talk) 21:42, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Specialized notes

• Genus of stick insect, singular not plural
• Link Western US? If you think it might breach WP:OVERLINK, don't bother.
• S. H. Scudder needs a link to Samuel Hubbard Scudder.
• Can a reference be found to the lede second paragraph sentence, it's too wow to not have a ref.
• (Order Dermaptera) order doesn't need to be capitalized.
• This type of disguise from predators is known as crypsis. This sentence seems unwieldy on its own, could it be incorporated into the prev. sentence?
• All Timema species with a dorsal stripe (eight species). All eight Timema...
• Small point, there's a space between ref 11 and 12.
• 21 species have... Don't start a sentence with a number, Twenty-one spp
• "there is at least one undescribed species known to exist" Ref please.

Generalized notes

• The lede needs expanding, two beefy paragraphs would be good.
• There are plenty of other free Timema images found on the commons here. Wanna add another one?
• Is there an alternate name for Timema? Walking stick insect? Or is that the order? If so add it to the lede, "Timema, also known as..."

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Once comments above are solved, this'll be fine.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): (citations to reliable sources): (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): (focused):

   Yeah, it'll do length-wise.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Atomician (talk) 21:42, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

Fixes and comments:

1. "Genus of stick insects" is correct. Both because the genus contains more than one species of stick insects, and because stick insects (phasmids) refer to an entire order of insects, not a single species or individual. Think of it like saying 'a flock of birds' or 'a herd of sheep'.
2.  Done
3.  Done
4.  Done
5.  Done
6.  Done (Check if wording is okay)
7.  Done
8.  Done
9.  Done
10.  Done Added. Mentioned in Sandoval & Crespi (2008).

Fixes for Generalized notes:

• Will leave that to someone else. ^-^
• No common names, AFAIK.
• There are actually only 3 images. Two of those are variants of the current taxobox pic. The other one only shows a very small part of a head of Timema and thus somewhat unsuitable.

-- Obsidi♠n Soul 22:09, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

That's great work, but the lede still needs a sizeable expansion because it's looking a bit like a tumble-weed strand right now. Atomician (talk) 13:32, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Lede expanded, thanks for the suggestion -- and thanks for passing this article! 15:59, 17 August 2011 (UTC) (said Sharktopus, somehow not signing it.) Sharktopus ^talk 16:32, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Timema poppensis

Even thought it may not match the proper gender, Timema poppensis is a valid name on ITIS and Catalogue of life and Timema poppense is not. There are 1700 hits on Google for Timema poppensis, and 9 for Timema poppense. Bob Webster (talk) 21:36, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Mistake in hyper links

The taxa box lists the family as being Timematidae, but it links to the sub order Timematodea?

for some reason Timematidae links back to Timematodea, despite being two different things, this is really confusing Wolfgang likes bugs (talk) 23:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Reverted a redirect back to a stub for Timematidae, I am going to correct the family now, should I add in Timematidea as the suborder in the taxa box? Wolfgang likes bugs (talk) 04:26, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

This is NOT a mistake; there is only one family in Timematodea, therefore there is only one article, not two. If there is ever a second family described, then Timematidae will get a separate article. Dyanega (talk) 15:11, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

I should also note, there is also a superfamily Timematoidea, by definition, also with Caudell, 1903 as the author. I have omitted this from the taxobox at present to reduce clutter, but in the eventuality that Timematodea is split into multiple superfamilies, it can be added in. Dyanega (talk) 16:16, 17 May 2023 (UTC)