Knowledge talk:WikiProject Insects/Archive 3

1454:

more order specialized projects like leps and beetles are more likely to come and go like many descendent projects do, but we know that the Insects project will be a fallback. Generally, taxonomists are the ones who remain focused on certain groups of insects, but many entomologists actually do work with different orders of insects rather than just one. When it comes to Wikiprojects, there's not an inherent need to split every order into its own project, so our default here should be to include the articles we want, and Beetles can include what they want per our Wikiproject guidelines. There's no need to delegate that only one project gets the article (the portal doesn't really do anything for these purposes). If we start decentralizing projects, we lose the ability to track the stats of the articles that would interest this project, especially if the watchlist tool returns. A lot of people just want to work on insects in general, and this is the place for that. I for one don't care what order an insect is in terms of keeping track of articles as an editor. If taxonomy is our concern, that's already in the species box of each article. Any issues you've brought up are easily addressed by having both tags with no clear benefit of removing the Insects tag, but there some potential disadvantages to removing it that I've mentioned.

3386: 1333:. Furthermore, an entomologist like yourself should know that entomology is divided in numerous fields (that's why some entomologists do beetles only, while some do only Lepidoptera). Yes, early entomologists like Linnaeus and Illiger did both and more but that's because they were very first entomologists. The scientific department is better organized nova days. :) To be honest with you, community lies everywhere, some folks edit aricles of beetles, other do butterflies, etc. Why we should offer them an option to join this or that project if they both have insect portal? I think you are so determined to keep it is because your project have almost 30 active members (I checked the participants section in the project). WikiProejct Lepidoptera have 17 to 19 active members, while beetles as you know have 4. Now, since no one arrived for a discussion I am wondering if you just told them not to come? No, I am not saying that you bribed them, although I fear that you might have, since as I said above no one came (and its already 2nd day of the debate). Lets call the above users again: 8952:, I don't think you'll really step on any toes if you change importance assessments. Importance ratings have been mostly done haphazardly and inconsistently. It would help to have somebody review them and change them. In my opinion, Top/High importance should be reserved for well known groups (orders, families) of insects that would be familiar to most lay people. Very few individual species deserve High importance. However, there are a lot of species/genera that are rated Low that probably deserve to be Mid. I think a rough rule of thumb for Mid importance might be; do non-entomologists ever write about them? Species that have some significance to humans are more important, whether that importance be as crop pests, disease vectors, pollinators, spectacular appearance, widespread presence in anthropogenic habitats, etc. Page views can provide some guidance; I'd think that most of the 1000 most viewed articles ( 6725: 7835:(recommended, not required and let's not say that manual taxoboxes are "deprecated"). I'm increasingly concerned about the ability of Knowledge to keep the information in taxoboxes up to date. Overall editor numbers have declined from their peak, but the number of articles with taxoboxes continues to grow. There's an enormous number of insect articles and a handful of editors working on keeping them up to date. Taxonomy will march on, but I'm not sure if Knowledge will if it continues to rely heavily on manual taxoboxes. The automatic taxobox templates are much improved since there was last any broad discussion of rolling them out (circa 2011). Status quo seems to be that using them should be decided on a WikiProject basis, and WP:INSECTS has never had any discussion. Let's have it now (and bring the Lepidoptera project in to the loop). 3250:+1 for course pages and +1 for task forces. Echoing what's already been said: setting up a task force subpage under WP:INSECTS is reversible, dirt cheap and doesn't split editors as long as the talk page is redirected here. A list of external resources, a todo list and a few guidelines goes a long way. About task force tagging: we waited more than a year before setting this up for the ant task force, mostly because there have been far too many projects that set up tagging in low-activity topic areas and then nothing happened. At the time, the task force had four "signed up members"; this was very much a border-line case, and I'm not sure how useful this has been so far (but that will most definitely improve with time). 7344: 3739: 2730:, the suborder to which crickets belong, you will see that there are many species in various families that have the word "cricket" in their common names and that makes the present name "Cricket (insect)" problematic. No one having objected to the change, I thought I would proceed with the move but find that the article "Cricket (insect)" is move protected. The reason for this is presumably because of a historic discussion on the primacy of the sport and the insect which sport won. That decision has no bearing on my proposed move. Would someone with appropriate authority like to either remove the move protection or do the move themselves? 7898:

with 59k articles! I think that it will be worth it in the long run, though--I'm presently working on getting the bee taxonomy sorted out, but even that small group is going to take quite a while as every single page must be edited. Perhaps there is a way to do batch conversions (I am thinking here specifically of the reduplicated 1500 Megachile species articles) automatically? Patrolling new pages should be easier--I know that there are a few people patrolling new pages to add them to the wikiproject, though I don't think that taxoboxes are being converted to speciesboxes in that patrolling check at the moment.

5586:(L.) Rothm. has a date of 1944 for priority purposes, but was described by Linnaeus in 1753. It's simpler for animals where description date and priority date are usually the same, but suppressed names and replaced names still need to be accounted for. Going with the earlier year of actual first description makes some sense to me (given the category name), but I suspect in practice, animal description in year categories are usually filled just going off the binomial authority date given in the taxobox (without researching further to see if the species was described earlier under a replaced/suppressed name). 8582: 4674:

vespids, etc) a place to start from--this is what is so nice about the Ant Task Force's pages, they tell you what needs to be done. I have found myself contributing there despite being having a broader interest in Hymenoptera simply because there is no organization for the rest of the order. A Task Force Hymenoptera could explicitly exclude (or link to) Formicidae, rather than encompassing it. Given that ants are a fairly unique offshoot of Hymenoptera (wheras there's more gray area with the bee/wasp divide, and much diversity within wasps), could this be an acceptable solution?

6632: 3859:

information but presents it as if it were studied for the specific species discussed, which is absolutely wrong. "The species creates its nests in soil, in stems of plants, in twigs, or will tunnel through rotting wood to create nests." - no it doesn't. Each species has its own preference. It sounds as if a single species can exploit all these different options. The same applies to the rest of the text. We can discuss the details for ages; the wisest thing to do would be simply to delete it all and leave it on the genus page where it belongs.

4811:. When Redrose and I were going through potential changes to the WikiProject Insects template, we found that there was a way to get the needs-image articles sorted into only one category (eg. ants or insecta), but this somehow prevented the "needs image" icon and text from displaying on the template of the talk page itself. We looked at dozens of other WikiProjects and couldn't find an example of a successful implementation of differential task-force tagging, so it may just be a limitation to the Wiki markup language. 5752:(in theory these could be turned into articles) and redirects from scientific names to common names (with ~99% of plant articles at scientific names, it made sense to me to tag the handful of scientific names that weren't article titles). For a while I was removing banners from pages that were turned into redirects (e.g., when a species got sunk into synonymy), but I got some flak for that. While there doesn't seem to be much consensus to add project banners to redirects, removing them isn't uncontroversial either. 6854: 3080: 619:

the standard. I'm also concerned about the Statistics section here as we can use that to track the status of insect related articles. When it comes to these articles, people are generally going to be interested in insects in general, so we should try to maintain that overarching connection. I don't see any reason to exclude the insect banner from any insect page since that's where the community really lies. Any less than that and we're specializing a bit too much in an already specialized topic.

965:

WikiProject Lepidoptera exists, that does not make it a model to be aspired to. Editors are free to create any WikiProject they like, of course, but that doesn't mean it's always a good idea, and they are not free to disrupt other WikiProjects. If the people at WikiProject Insects want to keep track of the beetle articles (or the lep. articles, for that matter), then they should be allowed to. The people to ask, then, are those who are members or active participants at WikiProject Insects and

6089:, and thought that at least 1,000 articles were tagged due to this (the reduplicative Megachile articles are 1,500+ by themselves). Does anyone remember what the Hymenoptera task force totals were? I've been finding a lot of untagged articles while going through WP Vespidae's old stuff, and realized that there are still hundreds of articles in the Hymenoptera category tree not currently tagged with the task force. No page history I've looked at shows that the categories were removed. Ideas? 4459:(ASP) is an electronic academic database publisher. Its "Academic Video Online: Premium collection" includes videos in a range of subject areas, including news programs (like 60 minutes) and newsreels, music and theatre, speeches and lectures and demonstrations, and documentaries. This collection would be useful for researching topics related to science, engineering, history, music and dance, anthropology, business, counseling and therapy, news, nursing, drama, and more. For more topics see 1169:

WikiProject Insects would be definitely concerned with systematics, so at least down to family level could bear the tag of WikiProject Insects where an entomologist doing a taxonomic sweep could find these conveniently & add value to these articles. Similarly articles on physiology, ecology, ethology and general topics would benefit from having both tags. The species pages, tens of thousands of them may not get any tangible benefit from being counted as an article under WikiProject.

31: 1700:

either. I do not deny the hard work of WikiProject Insects editors to promote several GAs and even an FA. However, WikiProject Insects only makes a few GAs and does not seem to bring stubs to C-class, for instance. In the long run, I think there is no real reason to tag beetle or moth-related articles with the WikiProject Insects banner. Besides, WikiProject Insects covers a huge scope, and if it were up to me, I would split WikiProject Beetles and WikiProject Lepidoptera even further.

315: 1932:

Insect tags. My take-away is that Mishae's main motivation is that having beetle articles associated with insect articles make it "hard to find" articles (although not specifying exactly where he was looking, or what), and that may be an issue, but I'd like to see WP Beetles become more established and self-sustaining before replacing Insect banners. In any case, if WP Beetles is to prosper, it will have to foster close interaction with other insect projects and editors.

3144: 4447: 604:. Why we need to keep them as insects if we don't do it for Lepidoptera? Infact, the smaller the category the easier it will to find anything. Honestly, even alphabetically its sometimes hard to find what you need. Plus, we don't add WikiProject Sports to every athlete even though that they are related. Now, I don't completely removing it, I live it for ants, leafhoppers, bugs, and other insects that are not butterflies/moths or beetles. Is that fair?-- 6743:. I uploaded couple hundred and was adding them to Knowledge articles and wikidata. In many cases her photographs are the best or the only photo of a given organism, and many of them do not have articles on en-wiki, so it looks like the main beneficiary of the collection so far are a few small wikipedias that used a bot to create articles based on Wikidata. I will continue uploading the rest of the collection, and placing it in 8384:

elucidates matters for the majority of non-scientists I've encountered. In cases where there really are a number of taxa at the same common name (especially for pest insects), a disambig page and articles at the scientific name is the way to go, but in cases where there is a clear common name, the page should probably live there. I think it's up to us as individuals to use our best judgement when creating and moving pages.

8721:

Euarthropoda as a phylum (and from my quick skim of the Ortega Hernandez paper, I'm not seeing that Euarthropoda is being treated as a ranked taxon there). I don't think at this point that manual taxoboxes should be changed en masse to show Euarthropoda as a phylum (articles using automatic taxoboxes have already been changed in en masse, but could easily be changed back with a single edit to a template).

748:- You don't see a reason but I do. WikiProject Insects is too broad already and therefore for the ease of navigating I will remove that project banner from butterflies/moths and beetles. Really, how would you find a beetle in a WikiProject Insects? I would suggest a vote. Some users already started adding WikiProject Greece to the animals that are endemic to it, I don't think there was consensus on that.-- 9698:, on the internet besides Knowledge scrapers mentions this genus name as ever being used anywhere. Even the sole reference cited there for its existence doesn't seem to have ever listed the name. It also doesn't appear in Evenhuis et al's list of Townsend's genus group names from 2015 (Townsend being the claimed authority). As I further mentioned on the talk page, I suspect it probably was supposed to be 2046:

we wouldn't want to set up too specialized of task forces here. Generally, they could be by order or groups of smaller orders with some like Hymenoptera that have distinct groups as common names as their own task force (e.g., ants, bees & wasps . Regardless of the project, we don't need to drill down to further taxonomic levels for additional subgroups within the project just because they exist.

1003:- O' there shouldn't be any doubt about that. Every concern about a butterfly or moth is being taken care of at WikiProject Lepidoptera, not Insects. My suggestion, we should continue on removing this project from beetle related articles because beetle project is a s huge as Lepidoptera. Just because it only have 4 participants, doesn't mean that it should be scoffed and ignored. Lets see what user 2780: 9023:) or WikiProject Polynesia, but lower on WikiProject Insects, simply because insect-oriented editors may be less likely to be knowledgeable on Polynesian cultural issues, or the species is relatively less prominent compared to insects as a whole. The best thing we can do is strive to improve as many articles as we can, while keeping an eye on those most likely to be seen on a daily basis. 9385: 7496: 5758:

with redirects, but was recently upgdated so that it follows the redirect to its target to alert the appropriate projects; as long as the target has the project banner it's not necessary to tag redirects for Article Alert purposes. Tagging redirects does have some use for searching and meta-categorization, but that functionality can be approximated with redirect categorization templates.

2219:

self-assessment, loss of editor interest, increased administrative load, and less efficient communication between users. Honestly, if stub creation of every beetle species (and genus, subgenus, tribe, subtribe...) is a goal, then maybe just get a bot to do it once and for all (how many stubs are essentially fleshed out data points from say Carabidae.org?), so that editors can focus on

2575:

need it rather than starting one for every order, etc. If someone wants to start a new task force, probably best to ask here first if the group thinks it would be worthwhile to avoid unneeded projects. Doing so would also show if there is a decent sized community involved in that area of work first to justify splitting off into their own Wikiproject if they are so inclined as well.

3819:: Could you give us some idea of what the "general information" part is, and whether it is correct and cited? Could you also clarify what "copied them" means exactly - does this mean that information that rightly applies to one species has been copied wrongly to other species? It would help also if you could provide some links and statistics on what has happened. I looked at 3 7616: 2485:

splitting WP:Beetles from WP:Insects – WT:Insects is not so chaotic that coleopterists can't have a beetle-specific discussion there. (Of the 6 topics higher up this page at the time of writing, one is exclusively about beetles and one is a list of missing articles that includes beetles alongside the other orders.) Splitting WP:Beetles further would be extremely unwise. --

3524: 8437:, one for 1812, one for 1813. The only link that works in either of these pages has a different year (1810)... I noticed this while trying to de-orphan some of these beetle stubs, but I don't know anything about beetles, or have any references to refer to. If someone could point me in the direction of a reliable reference, I would be grateful. Thanks. 952:

discussions that currently occur at WT:Beetles. I'm sure the split was well-intentioned, but I think it was probably unnecessary. I think my personal view is that for the discussions that matter, it's best to have as many voices as possible from a wide range of relevant backgrounds, and for that, a more inclusive project is a better project.

9019:, covering a whole family of bees, but primarily of interest to biologists. Keep in mind that WikiProjects are for tools for groups of editors on a single topic, and articles can have different importance rankings for different projects: an insect species with high Maori significance might rank higher on WikiProject New Zealand (and/or the 9902:, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time. 1976:

traction for me as I've read our guidelines for Wikiprojects. This project already is very species focused in how we describe how articles should be written within the project, so we already say our scope is to the species level. The descendent projects are largely editor interest based rather than unique article structure or topics.

7165:) may have been split out since Linnaeus described it). The distribution and habitat section is pretty heavy on the United Kingdom; it'd be nice to have more on distribution elsewhere, and I don't feel like habitat is really covered (from the food plants I infer that habitat is likely meadows and wetlands, not so much in forests). 442:. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are 4739:, though? It's a huge category already, but perhaps having everything in one place would be fine if they are cross-listed, as the only way to go through such a massive category is to divide it into smaller pieces. The other article categories (ratings/importance) would remain as they are. Any comments would be welcome! 6135:

AWB had some function to completely copy one line or tag and paste it slightly modified into the next line, but I'm not aware of that functionality yet. I probably won't get to it until next week, but if you just want to point me to the exact lists of articles to run this on, ~4,000 articles won't take long at all.

5580:) that the year category should be the year a species was first described scientifically, not necessarily the year that is relevant for priority purposes. I'll note that the botanical code handles priority quite differently from the zoological code; priority for plants lays with the combination, not the epithet, so 5405:(keeping up with taxonomic changes, adding blue links as articles are created), and the maintenance needed basically doesn't ever happen. I'd be happy to see these deleted (I've got my eye on a couple dozen mostly plant related species in genus navboxes that I intend to nominate for deletion in the near future). 8631: 6105:

of articles that should be included for the taskforce? I shouldn't have any issue adding a blank importance template, and someone can come along later to assess the article once it's tagged. With what I know of AWB, we'd need to have a bot request if we wanted to match the importance tags to WP Insects.

1249:(who didn't bothered to show up after I pinged him). Users Stemonitis and AshLin are neutral from my stance (although they are closer to agree with removing it). I might be wrong though. As for consensus, I maybe don't understand its function. What I know is that we have an editor here who thinks that 8298:

Yes and no. Education is not our primary role, which is to inform. That requires us to be both trustworthy and approachable. No doubt we fall over on both of those far too often, but making ourselves unapproachably graeco-latinate for the cases which you rightly acknowledge as "only a few exceptions"

8081:

Currently, the page on Derobrachus geminatus contains an entire article's worth of information on Derobrachus hovorei. While the two are similar, "palo verde root borer" is generally used to refer to D. hovorei, and the photos on the D. geminatus article are in fact photos of D. hovorei. In contrast,

7923:

or moths but once in a while it happens to me to hit other types of living like plants, or just simply other kinds of animal lifem geographicsm or others - and noticed also that different kinds of speciesbox are in use. Actually - these confuse me more than I would like. Sometimes I abandon an edit

7876:

speaks sense talking about 'recommended not required' - I think this is particularly relevant to the Insect Wikiproject with its 59k articles because of the issues of standardisation we'd encounter, either backdating as editors or patrolling new articles by non-project affiliated contributors if we'd

6153:

is still a red-link). At this point, if somebody with AWB (or a bot) is going to tag the remaining Hymenoptera for the task force, I'd suggest making them all default to "low importance" for now, and going back through later when the popular pages report is live to upgrade importance for the articles

5962:

Hi insect lovers (I'm not :-P ), I added 7 species to the list of this genus and a link to the publication. I don't have access to the full article and those criminals ask me to pay 50 dollars to see it (scientific pubs should be available for free; they are paid for already by tax money), anyone who

5757:

Overall, I'm not sure that the benefits in adding project banners to redirects justify the work involved. There are several tools and reports that depend on project banners, but they generally don't work with redirects, or redirects are irrelevant to their function. The Article Alert report does work

4754:

I would be okay with a overarching Hymenoptera task force, given that I tend to write on fossil Hymenopterans, neuropterans, mecopterans, and Okanagan highlands taxa. The articles needing images will always be a hard one to tackle due to the sheer number of species described. Thankfully for ants at

4673:

Thank you all for your comments, and linking to the archive (which I did not know existed!) I think that having a subproject Hymenoptera would be good given the relatively small number of people working on the task. It would also give teachers and others interested in improving specific groups (bees,

4601:

I'll admit I'm iffy on having overlapping task forces. I admit I'd have a slight preference for Hymentopera, but ants is also something distinct enough that people would come together to specifically edit about. Same could go for separate bees and wasps taskforces, so it's going to depend on if there

4373:

has maybe a hundred more that don't have the lep project tag (but many of those have the broader insect tag) I've tagged all the taxa in every other order (except Diptera, Hemiptera, Lepidoptera and Odonta, but there are likely other insect articles that haven't been categorized by taxon. Tagging all

2574:

There's a bit that went off topic specifically to task forces in Wikiproject Insects. Just commenting on the topic of this section, I agree with Animalparty and Stemonitis with considering a specific task force when appropriate. I'm only looking at this as a method to organize people where we feel we

1980:

describes this situation as the orders being good candidates to turn into task forces given the number of articles and the relatively limited number of editors we have. We might even be able to get a statistics page for each taskforce, but I'd have to look into how that table sets itself up. Articles

1742:

The main reason you bring up for the beetle and leps projects is improving stub articles. That's definitely justification for adding the Beetles tag in this case (or designating it as a task force), but I don't see a reason for removing the Insects tag. The latter is ultimately the question here (not

1490:

No it doesn't make sense, because WikiProject Insects have over 40,000 articles already and its difficult to find an article even in the alphabetical order. Plus, if WikiProject Beetles and WikiProject Lepidoptera will use this template why would WikiProject Football be off its WikiProject Sports, or

864:

Am I edit warring? If so where? Either way, I will wait till other folks will come here. I already read that pile of foo, and I am well aware of it. However, while it applies well to biographies because a lot of people do have multiple professions and origins, insects are different. Insects have only

618:

I'd actually look to add the Insect tag to the Lep articles as well for the reasons listed above. We generally don't make decisions in articles because others do the same (there's a guideline on that somewhere), so we can't really argue that because Lep articles don't have the tag that that should be

595:

I don't see anyone being diluted here, and nobody will. Look at various moths and butterflies from WikiProject Lepidoptera. All of the species are marked with WikiProject Lepidoptera only, not both. So, in short I will suggest to remove WikiProject Insects from those that are either Butterly/Moths or

9525:

That's a good question. Fauna Europaea lists Nemopalpus as a synonym of Nemapalpus. ITIS (and Catalogue of Life) and Zoobank have Nemopalpus as an accepted name. There are 2-3 times more Google Scholar hits for Nemopalpus in articles since 2014 and 2017. I'm not sure what the rules are regarding the

8383:

could probably live happily at the common name (though neither do at this time). Personally, and I am biased as an entomologist, I would prefer most insects be at the scientific name; but I know from my many educational outreach interactions with the public that the Latin binomial clouds rather than

8370:

which could have any of these names if they were given a common name. It's worse for bumblebees because the recent conservation craze has led to people giving the bees a number of inventive names, which are not used at all by the public. I believe that more than 95% of insect species articles should

8357:

I think that common vernacular terms should be at the common name (eg. "tree", "insect", or "fish"). However, a number of insect species--especially today--have "common names" which are promoted by single groups or organizations, such as conservancy agencies, which are not actually the "common name"

7477:

Would someone please check recent edits which added sections on Mating, Life cycle and Anatomy. There is a problem with the references, but the main issue is that the text contains text like "" for a ref. There are some tab characters in the article so it might have been prepared in a word processor

6333:

FYI, there isn't anything at the talk page that says discussion should occur here instead of at the respective talk page, but you do get more the attention of more people this way. Without seeing the actual source, I highly doubt the the German source is discussing any potential English common name,

6120:

through these and give them a quality rating. I believe that they are, by and large, deserving of the "low importance" flag. Would it be possible for you to give them all an identical flag, or would this also require a bot request (in which case getting the importance inherited would be preferable).

6104:

I can't recall anything that should have done this when I was retagging a lot of WikiProject Insect articles at least. That being said, I wouldn't mind taking on adding the taskforce to articles that don't have it listed yet since it looks like a good AWB canddiate. Are there easily accessible lists

4639:

should probably had been set up as a course page in the first place -- but if presumptive task force editors are interested in this family only, go for that. At the end of the day, the name is not that important (unless you intend to start tagging articles right away); subpages can be moved. I'd say

4555:

I'm interested in setting up a better page for a bee and bee allies project than that currently had by Project Apidae. There don't seem to be any articles tagged for this WikiProject, so it wouldn't necessarily be bad to start over (current group seems inactive after their class finished). Are there

4309:

If you're happy to work on tagging stuff for WikiProject Insects, poke around a bit more with CatScan. There are a fair number of articles that have no tags whatsoever. Pick a category for an insect order, set search depth to a decent number (I usually go for 6 which is probably overkill to get from

3858:

The added text contains three paragraphs, and cites five references, all at the genus level. The first paragraph includes a morphological description that is obviously at the species level and doesn't apply to so many species at once; it has no reference given. The rest of the text gives genus-level

2372:

will be a problem because users who want to look and update beetle articles will have 2 banners to choose from (one short and one long), which will be redundant. I don't see a reason for both tags present to ensure confusion. As for url, that should be the last resort. Beetles is a huge order that's

2045:

Well for one that's not really relevant here since Wikiprojects are independent of each other. We're discussing primarily what Wikiproject Insects should do, while discussion about what other projects should do generally belongs at those respective projects. Given what's been discussed above though,

1858:

How many editors do we need in order to form a project? As for my ignorance on consensus those edits help me to keep cool with you guys, otherwise reading your comments and calling most stuff that I say is irrelevant makes me quite angry. Its my first long debate, and since I don't know how and when

1699:

I believe that WikiProject Beetles articles and WikiProject Lepidoptera articles should be tagged as only that project, not as WikiProject Insects too. Although WikiProject Beetles and WikiProject Lepidoptera may not be good at improving articles, really, really, WikiProject Insects is not that good

1453:

The core reason I keep bringing up for maintaining the Insects tag is because this is the core Wikiproject where we are about as specialized as we can get while still having a decent number of people where we know the project will be active or attract more insect interested people in the future. The

1214:

to tackle this calmly. When someone reverts an edit or calls it out, that's the time to stop making the edits and discuss to reach consensus. That's Knowledge 101. Right now, a fair number of folks here are concerned about removing the Insects banner, while some are ok with it. We don't have a clear

8278:

The situations above are why we should be using the taxon names universally, with only a few exceptions. We are here to educate, part of that being using the most correct term for the articles, not the most commonly used lay name, especially given that less then 2% of all taxa will even have a lay

7897:

I was hoping to get some responses from more WP members. I know that some of the ants task force are using speciesboxes now, but hearing from them on this issue would be good. I personally think it'd be a good idea to move this direction, though, as Zakhx150 mentioned, it will be a tough row to hoe

7867:

at WP Beetles. Full disclosure: I can honestly say I've never used an auto-taxobox as an editor or creator, and my taxonomy skill is, frankly, amateur. However looking at the conceptual difference between that and manual and auto taxoboxes I'd have no problem in personally using it and recommending

7798:

Unrelated, I presume. There's been been a lot of (largely undiscussed) effort recently to switch manual taxoboxes to automatic ones. There were 24,000 species using the automatic taxobox system in December 2016; there are 38,000 today (not all of this increase is insects, but they are a big part of

7088:

It seems like there's a combination of editors there not being familiar insect morphology papers or that genitalia are commonly used as an identification feature. That and political related concerns are seeping in to what should be a cut and dry scientific description without being too technical on

5751:

is a notable exception, with almost 2000 redirects tagged for the project (representing almost 2/3 of all pages tagged for turtles). There were two of us who were doing some work put the project banner on plant related redirects. I basically only have done it in two cases; redirects due to monotypy

5449:

I'm not sure there are enough Bombus-specific articles for that, but having a "Bees" / "Non-Apis bees" / "Pollinators" template might be good--to introduce the reader to other pollinators (overview articles on the common bee families, eusocial/solitary, domestication, use in agriculture. ecology?).

5318:

Now that our project pages are being categorized better, I have taken the time to look through WikiProject Insects' templates. Most of them (283/350) are stub templates, which leaves . Many of these are templates for species in an insect genus. By the nature of Knowledge and insect diversity, these

3996:

The morphology information, on the other hand, is described in the source as relating to the genus not a specific species, as far as I can see. (It is not unsourced.) If this description is incorrect - for example if the source is wrong or if some species have different morphology in these respects

3992:

Thank you for raising this concern. Implying a variety of behaviours was undertaken by each individual species, when they might actually only use one, was definitely a serious mistake on my part. I will remove this material or will re-phrase it based on the individual species rather than the genus,

3823:

sp. articles and found a sizeable edit by Thine Antique Pen in only one of them, and that wasn't obvious nonsense at first glance (of course, perhaps that's part of the problem). To save everyone else from a similar search, some directions would be useful so we can assess what has actually happened

3715:

While I would not be surprised by misidentifications among featured images, I think this alternate id suggestion needs justification. Some of these can only be identified reliably by genitalic dissections, the coloration can vary widely and some of the structural features used in identification may

3235:

I'd also highly prefer task forces over sub projects for the reasons you mentioned. Seperate projects can get unwieldy with separate talk page banners, splitting up editors, etc. this could especially be the case of this project is really mainly for a class that's going to be done at the end of the

2753:

last year and the concerns were of close paraphrasing, which was eventually "solved" as it did not violate any policy and it was reasonable for incorporation. Overall, the list technically did not fail; instead it was archived (probably because of inactivity?), but it was in review for a long time.

1931:

I'm not sure if I've articulated my views yet but I agree with this course of action Kingofaces43 summarized above, for the time being: add Beetle banners if one wishes, but leave Insect banners in place: I don't see substantial harm in having both tags, and I don't see any net benefits to removing

1912:

their own tag if they want, but that's up to their own project and not us here. If Wikiproject Beetles obtains a fair number of editors to establish a good sized community to sustain itself, we could revisit the situation someday where Beetles would be considered a similar situation to what we have

1834:

Cleared up indeed. Those are my thoughts too for this moment at least. I have no problem with Leps remaining as is for now as they've got enough of a community going and are pretty well established. Beetles would need to establish itself as a community and have more people first before reaching the

1236:

I responded on my talkpage why I sometimes behave like this, but if you don't get it, bare in mind that my native language is Russian I sometimes think one thing and write something completely else. To be honest this is my first discussion where consensus plays a key role, so bare with me, I am new

990:

For the first time ever, I need to agree with you. However, the split was necessary. Both Lepidoptera and Beetles have over 10,000 articles. Yes, most of them are stubs, but so it goes with the Insect project as well. Lets focus on Insects, Beetles, and Lepidoptera, not biography and Sports, which,

959:

that a project covers. WP:LEP may have 88,839 articles, but only 1.2% of them are rated above stub-class. This is very, very low for a WikiProject, even a large one. WikiProject History is large, and more than a third of its articles are above stub-class. WikiProject Biography is enormous, and just

951:

The question, really, is how are these aims best served. In the case of WP:Beetles, I can't see much on the project page that wouldn't apply to all insects, and certainly not so much that it couldn't be accommodated in a larger project. Similarly, I doubt that WT:Insects would be swamped by all the

785:

I'm pretty sure I referenced that overtagging wouldn't be a problem (it'd likely only be two tags at most for most). If the beetle people want to tag the article and do things within their own project that's perfectly fine, but we should be following the guidelines for Wikiprojects and not removing

9225:

I'm applying for a reasonably large Wikimedia Foundation grant to support a year of Wikipedian in Residence postings at a wide (and growing) range of institutions throughout New Zealand. I'm posting a note here because I'm an entomologist, and several of the residencies will tackle insect articles

8929:

Who decides how important an article is for the project and how do they decide it? I disagree with the listed importance on several pages I've come across, some way too high and some too low in my opinion (maybe some editors are a bit beetle biased?). I don't want to make any enemies, and would be

8832:

As beetle articles represent approximately half of all the WP: INSECT articles there is a huge crossover with the WP:INSECTS section and I always welcome the tagging of both projects on talk pages and we always welcome everything from one-off or occasional contributions and new formalised members.

8337:

We aren't making ourselves "unapproachably graeco-latinate" for the exact reason that you just stated, the vernacular name is right there in the lead, and in a notable portion of cases taxa have multiple vernacular names anyways, making it even more logical to use the taxon name. Logic shows that

7065:

is an insect that was named after Donald Trump because one of its key features is a head covered by yellowish white scales. The other primary identifying feature listed in the source's key is genital differences compared to the other species in the Neopalpa genus; males have overall less prominent

6134:

The more I think about it, it actually should be doable to functionally do an inherited importance with AWB. I would need to do a little bit a front end work, but if for some reason that doesn't work, it's absolutely no hassle at all just giving everything a blanket low importance. It'd be nice if

5821:

is worthwhile, but I don't like doing so when it dumps everything into a massive category with fishes, birds, insects, etc. all intermingled. And it seems especially silly to add a talk page banner to flag one group of organisms in the intermingled category; better to set up subcategories. Support

5763:

Adding redirect categorization templates is not at all controversial. The link to how WP Plants does it captures the major rcat templates for organism related redirects. In the past year and half, support has been added for subcategorization. Plants, fungi and spiders have been spun off into their

4586:

Ants is already a task force, meaning that a task force Hymenoptera would overlap. Is this fine? Otherwise it could be broken up into ants, bees, and wasps. Since two of the other "big five" orders are under a single project, having all Hymenoptera together would make sense procedurally. Anyone on

4246:

awhile back, I'm going through and automatically adding Insect tags to articles currently listed at Wikiproject Beetles. I originally started just going through articles listed at Wikiproject Beetles, but I found a better way to focus just an articles that were affected by the user in the previous

2551:

That's exactly why I am removing tags from WikiProject Insects. If we will put every article in a single place (and insects have far more variety then just beetles (which is actually a half of the whole project mind you)) we will get chaos. If you are so reasonable, why are you still agreeing with

2231:

difficult to coordinate efforts between editors. It would be great if we had a team of professional Ichneumonidae specialists dedicated to improving Icheunomidae articles, but realistically we likely never will, and until that happens, keeping all wasps articles visible to a general insect project

1427:

Your above comments are not helpful (again) when you are taking this adversarial approach, especially when you ignore legitimate points brought up just as "I don't like it". That's why your behavior is at ANI right now. The points I've brought up are based on Knowledge guidelines, so we can't just

1209:

The way you are pursuing this is what I've been calling out on your talk page. Please refrain from taking this way too seriously as the "undesirable as an editor" comment is not appropriate here nor anything I said. It looks like you're reading way too much into this. We need focus on the issue at

534:

In practice though, there are quite a few narrowly focused organismal biology projects on Knowledge that have kept "their" talk pages free of the parent project's banner. Most Lepidoptera articles don't have a WikiProject Insects banner. Turtles aren't tagged for the Amphibian and Reptile project.

9781:

Almost read that as Google-flu, in which case I've probably caught a relative, hah. (I do most of my source-searching via Google too!) Didn't think of consulting Simuliid for some reason, wasn't sure if he/she is still around or would remember but maybe I'm just tired and didn't really think that

4571:

I'm generally in favor of turning an inactive project like this into a taskforce instead if it seems like it might get enough interest. I'd generally rather stick to mainly having orders as task forces, but if others think there would be enough support for a task force at this level, I think it's

4043:

is an acceptable source for the morphology of all the species in the genus. But we may be quibbling over details. I'm willing to revert all of the edits myself - which will take me a while - and will then add back any specifics later, where applicable, after leaving a notification here. Does that

3799:

species articles from August 28. He seems to have concocted general information about the genus Megachile together with specific information about a single species, and copied them over many species articles in the genus. The result is simply a devastating amount of misinformation in hundreds of

2514:

but then explain to me why WikiProject Sports for example have subprojects like Football, Baseball, Basketball, etc, and non of them are task forces, but rather independent projects? Either way, this discussion will be closed without my input, since I will be blocked for a month. I'm proposing to

1996:

I think this is an interesting idea, and could well be a good way to organise things in the future. Obviously, entomology is a potentially vast topic ("an inordinate fondness for beetles" and so on), but the project is intended to organise editors, not articles, and there aren't so many of those.

1562:

beetles) this is best accomplished through CatScan (the tool I've linked below) rather than browsing through a list of articles by WikiProject (especially since articles are more likely to be categorized than tagged for a Wikiproject; 289 beetles and coleopterists are tagged for neither project).

1468:

I reckon Wikiproject Insects should be the central project, resulting it to be tagged in all insect related articles. I weirdly picture it as "the mothership" since these orders are below and united under the Insecta class, if that makes sense. Because of that, I think it would work out fine if a

8720:

which says "...leads to the abandonment of the original meaning of Arthropoda sensu von Siebold (1848), as its strict diagnosis and taxonomic scope have become distorted in the recent literature" (von Siebold's sense included tardigrades). I don't see that any taxonomic databases are recognizing

6190:

I think that going back and tagging families as mid-importance would be a reasonable idea, provided that it didn't over-run previous assessments of high/top importance. There are a lot of tiny families in Hymenoptera, and it can be challenging to find good information on them. Thank you both for

5789:

Finally (and this is sort of a different topic), adding regular categories to redirects is usually discouraged, but there are some exceptions. The species described in year categories are intended to hold just species, not genera. For a monotypic genus, the year category should go on the species

2394:

Difficulty in navigation, if indeed a widely held view, might be solved by sorting project articles into more stub categories and/or (a reasonable number of) task-force categories, or perhaps there are more advanced templates, tools, and navigational aids we can employ to aid in finding articles

2218:

for an example of not-so well thought out WikiProject: one editor being interested in an obscure group of animals (at least among the general pool of Knowledge editors likely to contribute) is not enough to get a project going. Drawbacks of too small or narrowly focused projects include too much

1561:

I don't understand why you're looking through 40,000 pages to find a specific article. What is the situation where this needs to be done? If you want to find an article, put the title in the search box. If you want to find a set of articles meeting particular criteria (i.e., those that are about

1168:

Imho, in what way is an article in particular and the encyclopedia in general served best by adding both tags of the mother & daughter projects? I do feel that the WikiProject Insects tag by itself may not add value to the article in all cases of articles of WikiProject Lepidoptera. However,

964:

32%) of its articles are above stub-class. Even the neonate WikiProject Beetles manages 2.6%. WikiProject Lepidoptera does not seem to have had great success in improving the quality of articles, and I am unconvinced that WikiProject Beetles will be any different in the longer term. Just because

137:

C-class as it lacks a couple important sections. There really should be some discussion of its geographic distribution and habitat. A physical description of the species would also be helpful (although it can be very difficult to write a description at a level appropriate to a general audience;

8797:. The initial species description was in 1950, but it received a replacement name in 2014. It's unclear to me if this category is literally meant for the first formal description of a taxon or the year of its present author citation. Sorry if this is a silly question, thanks for any guidance :) 1190:

To answer your first question, I believe that using both sister and moth projects is redundant and I believe that we should follow WikiProject Lepidoptera example: just use WikiProject Lepidoptera and that's it. It was like that for centuries so why change it? Because of it, I decided to change

10152:

as a subclass. If you see a problem with the taxonomy displayed by an automatic taxobox in the future, you can click on the red pencil icon that appears just to the right of the words "Scientific classification". That takes you to a display of all of the hierarchical templates that are used to

7951:

I'm relatively new to the automatic taxobox and speciesbox format, but I didn't find it more difficult than the original taxobox format; the one issue could be one-time edits from unregistered users, as it's not immediately obvious how to edit the tree (but you can do it by clicking the pencil

7723:

Hello fellow members of WP Insects! There has been some talk by a few of you over various pages about using the speciesbox/automatic taxobox templates rather than the historical taxobox template. As far as I'm aware, there's no official stance here at WP Insects about which one should be used.

7135:

for an quality reassessment as I'm working on updating it further and would appreciate the benchmark. Hoping its about 'C' class now, but happy to take pointers on where to expand (or indeed if there is a more useful place to suggest peer reassessments that I'd missed). I would have done so at

6119:

I have taken a look through some of the articles in the category trees I suggested, and very few were tagged (but not none). The problem is there are 1,400+ wasp articles, 2,300+ bee articles, only 600-some of which are currently tagged with the task force. It would take a very long time to go

5404:

I'm not a fan of species in genus navboxes at all. Categories and the taxobox provide similar functionality for readers. Including lots of red links in navboxes is frowned on, which means they can't be done properly for the vast majority of genera. Navboxes create an extra level of maintenance

3185:). I welcome contributions on social insects, and hope to support Agelaia's course, but it seems to me that taskforces under WikiProjects Insects would be more appropriate than largely independent subprojects. As far as hymenoptera go, ants are covered as a task force rather than a subproject. 2484:

Is WikiProject Beetles so busy with all manner of varied discussions that it's impossible for a set of Carabidae specialists to discuss their particular issues? No? Then you don't need to split the project in order to facilitate their work. I don't think there's even a very strong argument for

1975:

As an additional note, I think it would be better to have task forces for the specific orders within Wikiproject Insects as taskforces. This all isn't something I'm going to pursue right now, and I'm not interested in deconstructing their Wikiprojects, but it's an idea that's been getting more

1743:

removing the Beetles tag). I haven't seen anything beyond not wanting to have multiple tags brought up to address that, but that's not a problem looking at the Wikiproject guidelines I mentioned earlier. Are you just addressing keeping the beetles tag more or actually removing the insects tag?

9124:

Hello. I have noticed that many cerambycid species articles have the genus in bold in the taxobox despite being part of a polytypic genus. I have been, and will likely continue to remove the bold from these articles from time to time, but this is quite a large job and some assistance would be

7724:

Several editors have expressed interest in moving away from taxoboxes to increase the maintainability of our thousands of pages when new taxonomical information comes out. Should we recommend the usage of the more centralized speciesbox/automatic taxobox or keep things how they presently are?

5822:

for subcategories can be added if there is sufficient interest in making use of them. If there is interest, insect editors should figure what subcategories they want. Just "insects", or also "beetles", "lepidoptera", "hymenoptera", "ants" to correspond to existing task forces and subprojects?

2191:

seems to be a convenient way to organize articles, although it also has limited participation. Certainly in most cases a task-force should be proposed before a new dedicated sub-project. However, I feel the creation of any new projects or task forces within existing projects should be largely

1134:

I wont listen to an ultimatum. I said why the tag should be changed, and you are the only one who object this. I see that people issued an opinion not an ultimatum like you did. WikiProject Lepidoptera doesn't use it, why should this? And why should I listen to you if other editors might have

540:

Mammals were recently segregated among six subprojects: Cats, Dogs, Cetaceans, Equines, Primates and Rodents. A few months ago I went through cats, dogs, cetaceans and equines and added the mammal banner to all the species articles. I did catch some flak from somebody who apparently thought I

528:

I think it would be better to include both project tags (Insects and Beetles). Part of the point of having the projects is to enable collaboration, and it doesn't help when the pool of potential collaborators is narrowed. Collaboration is probably more effective when more narrowly focused, so

513:). I would think that this project should be included on all insect pages to link to a central project, but am I missing some conversation related to this? I'm a bit concerned we're getting too specific in Wikiprojects we list on the talk page otherwise, so I'm just curious what others think. 8816:

Dear mother project, I'm here on behalf of the 'semi-active' sub project WP: BEETLES just to highlight some of the excellent work that has been undertaken in the last 12 months and to highlight that the project as a standalone is still in the minds of some of us. I've personally adopted the

5783:

If you do want subcategories it would probably be good to figure out in advance how many you want. Will "insect" be sufficient, or would "ant", "hymenoptera", "beetle" and "lepidoptera" also be desired (I'm not sure it should get broken down any more finely then the existing taskforces and

2277:

to be a bad example of a project. But, the beetles is a huge order. It have millions of species equaling to Lepidoptera. What am I seeking is to change WikiProject Insects to WikiProject Beetles because a smaller subproject still have alphabetical order, but is not so impeding. For example

5178:

are unnecessary: until Project-class is actually added, it's converted to NA-class; and when Project-class does get added (by any of the above methods), the banner will auto-detect the namespace (in this case Knowledge talk:) in order to set the class. So you don't need to go round adding

8082:

the page of D. hovorei is a pitiful stub. In fact, even the references listed on the D. geminatus page identify D. hovorei as the palo verde beetle, so I'm unsure how this mishap occurred. Hopefully someone with greater site credibility can go ahead and switch the content of the pages?

3379: 3936:"Could you also clarify what "copied them" means exactly - does this mean that information that rightly applies to one species has been copied wrongly to other species?" - as I already said, he/she mixed genus and species-level information. I don't know what was the original species. 865:

order/family and distribution. Because really if lets say an athlete is a football player should we add both Football and Sports template, just because some folks might want to join Sports project rather then its subprojects? I think I stated a reason for it removal very clear on top

4620:), which leaves us to the name and scope. I think this is very true: "distinct enough that people would come together to specifically edit ... instead of creating taskforces for the sake of taxonomy". What is the common denominator of your "target audience"? Are people interested in 9873:

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template

2209:

seems like a tremendous amount of needless hair-splitting. What benefit is served by dividing that project into sub-projects or work-groups? The 4 editors would presumably still be talking to each other! It would also increasingly narrow and compartmentalize resources. Check out

175:

B-class might indeed be appropriate at that point. I've got a couple more thoughts. Maybe larva could be covered in a Life Cycle section? That would also give a place to talk about what time of year the adults are active. The Light Production section is really more appropriate to

6425:

article there is an image of butterflies supposedly feeding from blood on a sock. This strikes me as rather unlikely for a nectar feeder. There is no common or scientific given so I have not been able to verify this. Do others think this is a likely behaviour for a butterfly?

4793:: yes, this category is way too crowded, and excluding pages already listed in the more specific categories would make it easier to find eg dragonfly articles without images. But actually making the main category browsable would require splitting it into even more subcategories. 182:; nothing wrong with discussing it at the species level as well, but the genus article should certainly have something on physiology of light production. The second paragraph in the Defense describes the results of a single study in greater detail than is necessary. Predation of 2683:

I have been tagged somewhere on this discussion and have tried giving this a reading but forgive my tiredness when it comes to such disputes. I can only look forward to seeing a day when Mediawiki search allows one to search by (taxobox) template parameters and their contents.

7189:

Thanks for the reassess and the general comments there, much appreciated. I appreciate its a bit York/UK-centric at the minute, but that's where all the conservation excitement is going on and I see that first hand. It's a fair point and I'll see what I can do there. Cheers.

7585:, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding reach of WikiProject Philosophy, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at 3188:

Should hymenoptera families be covered as subprojects, or as taskforces? I don't have the template editing privileges to make new task forces for WikiProject Insects, but I'd be happy to do some of the rote assessment work if Vespidae and Apidae are enabled as task forces.

7619: 4727:. Very few other WikiProjects have the differential attention/needs-image categories that WikiProject Insects has, and it's making it challenging to add a second task force. Would you guys mind if the ants articles needing attention or needing images were cross-listed in 1721:

Was about to go to your talkpage for it. Either way, thank you for your input. You see, what you said above its exactly what I am trying to achieve but no one listens. My proposition of splitting both WikiProject Beetles and WikiProject Lepidoptera even further is in the

4310:

order down to species), exclude any subcategories that bring in irrelevant stuff (e.g. fictional characters). And maybe set a minimum article size of ~200 bytes to keep from getting redirects. It looks like there about 200 Hymenoptera articles that haven't been tagged (

7618: 7623: 7622: 7617: 4058:

This source deals with bees of the Eastern United States only. While the description may hold for other species too, we cannot be sure. Michener's book would be better for this purpose. In any case, at the very least, the mentioning of black color has to be deleted.

4073:

What do you mean "add back any specifics later, where applicable"? You should revert your edits and then you can edit each species separately, as much as you have time and will, with specific information validated at the species level. If that's what you mean, OK.

2479:

If, for instance, exactly the same group of editors were to work on two related sets of articles, then there would be no point in setting up a second project for the second group, because those editors already have a site where they can talk to each other freely.

2153:

You know, I am not the one who is being adversarial, but you are. It is you who don't want the Insect tag to be removed. If you so like it, then why can't you hang it on your own talkpage and be proud of it? Furthermore, I am not creating drama, I just want user

685:

Like WikiProject Insects, just like Lepidoptera is huge. So my suggestion would be to change WikiProject Insect to WikiProject Beetles for beetles, and then we can create beetle task forces, like it is with ants. I think this sounds like a good plan. Maybe users

7624: 5713:

about this course of action and recommended a general discussion. My thought was that the tagging of redirects with WP insects, combined with classifying the redirects might make them searchable (eg. find all monotypic taxon redirects for WP insects). Thoughts?

2373:

why templating it as a separate project is a must. After this we can create task forces, such as Ground beetle task force for example. I think I gave plenty reasonable explanations even repeated them serveral times, yet no one here listens to it either way. :(--

10147:

and the related templates used to create the automatic taxobox were created by a bot, which did a pretty good job as far I'm aware. This is the first time I've heard of it omitting a rank. I assume it has something to do with some uncertainty about recognizing

2204:

merely the number of articles (existing or expected) to be dealt with. Like articles, a project is only as good as the editors who participate and stick around. There are currently only 4 active editors on WikiProject Beetles, and the proposed sub-projects at

7964:, without needing to copy the rest of the family tree. The other parameters (eg. for images, captions, range maps, subdivisions, etc) are largely the same. I'd be willing to write a tutorial on the WP insects front page if you (or others) feel it would help. 5614:

It's up to you. I might comment here a lot, but I don't work on insect articles much and don't want to tell the people who do work on insects what to do. I'm just offering perspective from another project that has had to wrestle with multiple possible dates.

2529:

There are lots of editors who edit within the field of football, but are not so interested in other sports. The same for baseball, basketball and the others. If all discussions of sport-related articles occurred in a single place, it would be chaotic indeed.

3378: 3593:

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the

255:

4262:

It looks like I got all the articles re-tagged that we part of the previous conversation at least. I have a decent system set up with AutoWikiBrowser, so if in the future we want to add taskforces or delete inactive daughter projects, just let me know.

1413:. Because really, what kind of discussion is this when only you, me, Stemonitis, AshLin, and Plantdrew are here, and only me and you are discussing it while the rest just said their opinion on the matter and left. I imagined discussion differently. :(-- 6312:

Not sure about the rights and wrongs of 'inventing' an English common name based on one used in another language. In fact there does appear to be an English name, at least in scientific usage: "sapygid wasps". Suggest changing the article accordingly.

2026:

The idea is good, but I had a different one. Lets create task forces for WikiProject Beetles and WiikiProject Lepidoptera individually. What I am saying is that for example an article on ground beetle will be marked with WikiProject Beetles template .

4311: 4011:

If you have information only at the genus level, you should write it as such. All the text needs to be rephrased as relating to the genus, and the species name should be totally removed from the section. What is the source for the morphology part?

2250:

Lastly, to Mishae's claims that having large amounts of articles impedes maintenance or location of articles, let's work on those issues first, lest in our haste we create more serious ones. What exactly are you seeking, and where are you looking?

8585:

Members of this wikiproject might be interested in participating, remotely or in person, in an upcoming edit-a-thon. With the support of the University of Auckland, I'll be helping run an all-day workshop centred on the 52 species depicted on the

3204:

I'm in favor of task forces over sub-projects, since the editor pool of almost any group of insects is likely to be nearly the same as that of WikiProject Insects, unlike say, the editor pool and relevant interests of Mammals or Bird projects. As

6154:

that get a decent number of page views. If you want taxonomic rank to play a role in the importance ratings (e.g., families as mid or better importance), it's possible to search for articles with "idae" in the title to in order to re-rate those.

5810:

My comment got pretty long, so I've collapsed it and will summarize. I've added WikiProject banners to the talk pages of some redirects, but I'm not really sure it's worth the effort. I do think adding redirect categorization templates (such as

2589:

I totally agree with that. I really think its a pity there are so few editors for such a vast topic (I know there are about 50, but for a topic that covers 1,000,000 articles, that's underserved). I propose that recruiting should be a priority.

8627: 2832:

and check a few of the flagged concerns. Comments welcome regarding potential improvements. These likely copyright violations can be searched by WikiProject categories. Use "control-f" to jump to your area of interest (if such a copyvio is

2448:

related projects. I disagree with your view that "Beetles is a huge order that's why templating it as a separate project is a must", but please don't confuse disagreement with refusal to listen; your views may or not be shared by others, but

8150:

I thought the idea was that we only used common names as article titles when they were unique. Otherwise we use the scientific name, mentioning the common name(s) in passing. The common names can of course be listed on disambiguation pages.

5431:, even if these are incomplete: visitors may well find navigation useful, and are quite unlikely to spot the category entries at the end of articles on their first visit. I'd say that such popular entries should not be purely taxonomic: for 1594: 8665:

From what I can find, this seems to be a French term for "cockroach" (or whatever the local etymology considered such) that was used in the French Antilles. As such I don't think it would merit a redirect, not being a common English term.

8594:

on the Tāmaki campus, free to attend, with lunch and refreshments supplied. We have 7 signed up so far, mostly postgraduate students new to Knowledge, so we could use experienced editors. If anybody else wants to join in please go to the

6041: 3764: 546:

On the other hand, I don't think all insects should tagged for WikiProject Arthropods (which is effectively pretty much WikiProject Crustaceans) or WIkiProject Animals, but I don't really have any logical justification for that stance.

7621: 5741:

There are 3 types of edits to consider with regard to redirects: 1) adding project banner to redirect talk pages 2) adding templates that categorize the type/purpose of the redirect (e.g. alternative scientific) 3) adding conventional

637:

is helpful here. Essentially, we don't remove banners when a Wikiproject claims it's within its scope. I don't see any danger of overtagging here either, so it seems best to mesh with our Wikiproject guidelines by just including both.

4388:

I've no gone through the remaining Diptera, Hemiptera and Odonota. Every insect taxon article should now have a banner for WikiProject Insects or WikiProject Lepidoptera (provided the article had a taxon category in the first place).

10153:

generate the automatic taxobox for that taxon. The hierarchy is constructed via a series of parent relationships, which means when you see a error, you need to edit the template immediately below the problem. In this case, I edited

5777:

Without a subcategory, it's not easy to search for say, monotypic insect taxa redirects, unless they have the talk page tagged with the project banner. But with a subcategory, there's no need to have the talk pages tagged for these

9226:

and collections: at Landcare Research, for example, I'll be organising putting a collection of beautiful illustrations of different beetle species by NZ's foremost insect illustrator into Commons, and will be running edit-a-thons

4403:

Great! I thought you mean all species for a second there. Someday I'd like to consider task forces by order for the project so people can go into their taxon of interest a little easier, but that's a task for another day by far.

2443:

WP Insects, where consensus is currently undecided (hopefully this discussion will help that), I don't think a small amount of redundancy on Talk pages is inherently bad or disruptive; that project overtagging guideline concerns

9914:. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals. 10125:, and an awful lot of those pages seem to have taxoboxes that go straight from Class to Family. If I click on the family, I can find out what order it belongs to, but why doesn't the order show up on the species page? Example: 4342:

Wow, good work on the beetles. I've been leaving some Hymenoptera articles that are being actively worked on for university assignments without class and importance categories. I'll wait until the students are done with them.

10306: 9067:

Suggests, but doesn't require. It really is arbitrary, and at this point, most high importance articles have already been created. If you think reassessing will lead to practical improvements, have at it, but I don't think

6546:

Many participants here create a lot of content, may have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the skills considered at

6052:, there are a huge number of open license sources compatible with Knowledge including around 9000 journals. I can see a very large opportunity to easily create a high volume of good quality articles quickly. I have done 1191:

WikiProject Insects to WikiProject Beetles for beetle related articles. I don't do anything against the rules when I do so, yet user Kingofaces43 finds my edits undesirable and find me undesirable as an editor as well.--

9764:

already been pinged in reference to this supposed genus? Maybe they have an explanation. I would imagine the article can probably be deleted as it seemingly never existed and the existing incoming links can be removed.

8623: 3211:"If the scope is too closely related to an existing project, then having separate projects is usually inefficient and counterproductive, because you wind up dividing the few interested editors across multiple projects." 842:

Saying you will continue to remove the banner is not the way to approach this at this time. The rest of that page indicates how to handle multiple projects with interest in an article, so I highly suggest reading that.

489:

10 days probably isn't a very reasonable amount of time, but I took a stab at copy editing the first half of the article. I'll try to get back to the second half, but I'm going to be pretty busy for the next few hours.

5839:

Unfortunately it is not just redirects relating to taxonomy but includes speedy deletions, spelling variations and other kinds of redirects including those to specific sections. The one I did not see much point in was

2399:). I personally don't think that large categories are inherently bad, and we certainly shouldn't make large, far-reaching, or controversial changes simply to appease, or make life more convenient for, any single user. 7390:

That would be my rough guess too, but I'm also not trained in bee identification to species. My preference is to usually use pictures from reliable sources that identify the species rather than us doing it ourselves.

6663: 5120:

will allow eight extra classes: Category, Disambig, Draft, File, Portal, Project, Redirect and Template. Of course, any combination of these eight can be set up by including the appropriate parameters as described at

808:

Some editors are not even a part of those project, so why should you care? The other reason I do it (and will continue), is because majority of them were written before WikiProject Beetles became active again. As for

4981:, List, NA) is in use. There are two ways that Draft-class can be added to this. If the WikiProject wants to add seven more values including Draft (Category, Disambig, Draft, File, Portal, Project and Template), add 10120:

I've just returned to Knowledge and stub sorting, after a very long break, and some things have changed! Automatic taxoboxes seem pretty great, but I don't understand how they work. In particular, I'm going through

4909: 4435: 2907:, but rather directories of biographical content for those seeking sources. Some freely available online, others at JSTOR, paywalls or books, but feel free to add other general references, freely accessible or not. 3473:

I love that writer of the copyvio tool is named earwig. I don't think it would be noteworthy for its own article since any information would go to the relevant species article if anything was going to be included.

565:

I definitely see the a various ways of approaching this. For us, insects in general are really the unifying factor, so I think we are diluting ourselves too much as well if we starting removing the Insects banner.

3842: 8239:

The Knowledge cannon for black fly is the one I am familiar with, though the members of that family are locally called "sandflies" not "blackflies". I think this is a case where Knowledge is a bit US-centric (?)

4643:

The reason I prefer to keep ants separate from a shared Hymentopera task force is because "ant people" tend to be interested in ants only, and only tangentially interested in our friends the bees (and termites).

1913:

with Wikiproject Lepidoptera right now. There might be other options to consider than splitting off new Wikiprojects, but that's a topic for another day. Does that sound like a fair summary and course of action?

9863:

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

4806:

Yes, the ant articles needing attention are now being listed in both categories. The images issue you mentioned (not being able to find minor groups) is already the case, with such a huge number of articles in

1253:

is appropriate here and ignores the proposed suggestions until I need to write it all caps, and then it turns out that I am a bad guy? Wow. Look, here is another reason why we should remove this template: Both

887:

The point is not to remove banners when you've been made aware there is opposition to it. The issues you are bringing up now are fixed by simply adding the Beetle template rather than replacing the Insect one.

10189:

as both the Order and Subclass, so skipped over them to use the Class as the parent of the family. I'll make sure this has been resolved or flag it as an exception in the future so it can be handled manually.

7211:

I've improved the article throughout since last I asked. Still a bit stumped on this reference to it being split out from its original genus. I'm not particularly strong on taxonomy to be honest. Any wisdom?

6071: 2632:

In case I was unclear, the only statement I agreed with is that we should not just create family taskforces for the sake of creating taskforces. I wasn't saying anything else. Does that make me a bad editor?

152:

Thanks for your advice, Plantdrew. I will tag it back as C-class. Do you think that after a section on their larval stage and geographic distrubition and habitat are created, it could be a B-class article?

10218:= Pterygota is treated as a Class, then Archaeognatha can also be treated as a Class. We may end up in the same situation as birds, where we have to deal with widely used but incompatible classifications. 5517: 5065:

And many more without one! I've run across quite a number while trying to tag Hymenoptera task force articles, and I imagine I've only skimmed the surface. I think a redirect class would be a great idea.

9276: 9220: 2278:

WikiProject Beetles as of now have 10,266 articles while Lepidoptera have 86,000 and Insects have 40,000+. But, its pointless for me to say anything since no one here will listen, and I already violated

745:

I don't see any reason to exclude the insect banner from any insect page since that's where the community really lies. Any less than that and we're specializing a bit too much in an already specialized

322:

I saw this beauty in France, Loire Valley region whilst on holiday last year, about 4 to 5cm long in the body. I've looked at various on-line gallery resources but can't find an exact match. Any ideas?

3426: 2475:

I am in agreement with Animalparty on the one key issue that keeps getting missed here (especially, but not exclusively, by Mishae). I will stress the important concepts to avoid any misunderstanding.

529:

subprojects like Beetles, Vespidae and the Ants task-force are a good thing, but people who are interested in working on insects in general are presumably still interested in beetles, vespids and ants.

4488: 7872:

it first. Looking at it as an amateur entomologist rather than a wikipedian, it looks straight forward enough and would probably be quite useful personally to those in a similar situation to myself.

2187:

I think there is some merit in creating some broad level task-forces within WP Insects that lack the broad editor base of Lepidoptera, although not every order needs a task-force (Stepsiptera?). The

8581: 1634:

I've been meaning to check into how Knowledge bots work, so I'm happy to look into this at some point. I've done quite a bit of script coding in the past, so I'll see what (if anything) I could do.

1602: 9553:, citing Duckhouse, D. A., and D. J. Lewis. 1980. Family Psychodidae, pp. 93–105.In R. J. Crosskey , Catalogue of the Diptera of the Afrotropical region. British Museum (Natural History), London.: 8778: 8483:, I am not certain, but I believe it is a misspelling as there is only one mention of that spelling prior to 1999 in the Google Scholar literature search, and it occasionally occurs alongside the 5639:

as described in 2015 only if the article was about the name, as opposed to the taxon that the name refers to, which is the case on WP. Adding both would also be OK imo. I've added a short note at

10300: 6739:

from flickr relicensed the collection of her 6 thousand photographs so they can be uploaded to Commons. Most of her photographs are high quality shoots of identified insects from eastern US, see

4128: 1605:(slow) that don't have either project's tag. We are still a long way from having all beetle articles tagged for the beetle project, and this task might be better accomplished by employing a bot. 8717: 7534:

is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject and related task forces have signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month,

7161:

Done. I think C class is fair. But it would be good to have a section on the taxonomic history (it was originally placed in another genus, and I have a strong suspicion that other species (e.g.

7073:

where some editors are saying information in a species key if it talks about genital size is not important, and that basic information about the differences in species genital features (such as

4278: 3281:"Contributions to the knowledge of Formicidae (Hymenoptera, Aculeata): a new diagnosis of the family, the first global male-based key to subfamilies, and a treatment of early branching lineages" 9439: 8317:) that cover all animals. It is fine for birds and mammals but gets annoying if only one member of a genus has a common name (so is at that name) and all other members are at scientific names. 6626: 5877:

book and journal references can be exported on the reference's details page (expand the reference by clicking on it and follow the linked id to the details page, then click on 'Export' --: -->

6356:

On the talk page for the article in question it says "If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion ..." - that's what I was referring to.

5570: 3334:

Cheers, I'll go read it now. I see that plenty of new and useful information is available, so I'll see what I can incorporate from the source. The images and diagrams will be beneficial too!

6685: 9855: 10325: 8133:

Would it not be better to have a policy that such species, which are often known by different common names in different parts of the world, are always listed under their scientific names?

4865: 9911: 9724:

Caveat: I'm not a Tachinid expert, but I do have decent Google-fu. I also checked the books on Archive.org, Google Scholar, and Hathitrust -- nothing comes up. Google Books does bring up

8806: 8698:, the phylum has been changed from Arthropoda to Euarthropoda. Is there a consensus about that? Should insect articles' taxoboxes be changed? I was just surprised to see it and wondered. 8608: 7297: 5081: 4990: 3456: 2611:

Its a pity that you sided with Kingofaces43. I was thinking of you as a good editor instead... ...You just like to side with older folks. Wondering if you did the siding out of fear? :(--

7620: 2750: 6150: 5364: 3110:

article has been submitted for a peer review, just in case any of you guys would like to comment or give your thoughts. All criticism and recommendations will be greatly appreciated.

1135:

different opinion. Either way, yes, I will stop, because its past my bed time, but tomorrow I will read what consensus came too. Sounds fair? Also, please sign your name. Thank you.--

470:

Hello all, I have requested one of the articles I have been editing on to undergo a copyedit, but it seems that the article I have edited substantially hasn't had any response to its

8020:

A problem with common names is that they often refer to multiple species. You are right that both species above have the common name "Florida leaf-footed bug". I've put a hatnote at

7089:

morphological terms. It seems like something that's silly that shouldn't be disputed, but that's why I'm asking for more eyes from editors familiar with entomology topics like this.

6699:

Any improvements (whether adding other taxa, or shooting down my mistakes in flames) would be welcome. I'm mildly nervous, because Hopping & Hopping are named as authorities for

1113:

Wikiproject where their banner goes. The existence of Wikiproject Beetles does change that. Seriously, just add the Beetles tag without deleting the old one. It's as simple as that.

8875:) for additions, advice, taxonomic corrections, reviews, copy-editing, article creations etc. - your efforts have not gone un-noticed and have helped my Knowledge editing no end. 8013: 9664:

I guess Knowledge doesn't need both articles. I'll merge the articles and redirect from the newer (Nemopalpus) to the original, and we can reverse the redirect later if necessary.

8487:

spelling in more modern documents where there is clearly only one species being represented, presumably as a typographical error. My best bet is that the appropriate reference is "

8120:, an invasive species for which I am currently writing an article. This latter species is also known by the name "serpentine leafminer", and guess what, we already have an article 7315: 6882:, it intends to bridge the academia-Knowledge gap by encouraging contributions by non-Wikipedians, and by putting content through peer review before integrating it into Knowledge. 6669:

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

6580: 946:" a convenient forum for those involved in that project to talk about what they are doing, to ask questions, and to receive advice from other people interested in the group's work" 4502: 9687:

I've been meaning to get attention to this article for a while now (I tried before as an anonymous IP user, but with no success), so I thought I'd bring it up here. The article "

8362:, which I have heard called the following: blue bee, blue mason bee, blue orchard bee, blue orchard mason bee, mason bee, and orchard bee. There are a large number of species in 4849:

might be a merge candidate with Cultural entomology, or might be distinct - there is a stalled merge discussion which it would be nice to restart and close one way or the other.

9451: 5693:

Since we updated the category system, I was occasionally tagging WP Insects redirect pages with WP Insects tags and the various scientifically pertinent redirect codes, such as

5487: 3733: 1109:

Mishae, you don't appear to be hearing what we're saying, but you need to stop removing the banners at this time. You seem to be plowing ahead with this regardless. It is up to

9889: 995:, this disruption is only concerns Kingofaces43, because prior to his issue of a concern everything was going well. I hope you are not trying to side with him and accuse me of 541:

intended to tag all articles under the scope of WikiProject:Equine with the mammal banner (I had no intention of tagging stuff like "saddle" or "reins" as relevant to mammals).

7981: 5352: 4912:

a tagged draft. Not categorizing per task force would also work, because we're not likely to have too many of these at the same time, but per task force would be really cool.

4026:

And please save us and yourself more trouble and don't change anything until we reach some consensus here. Unless you decide to revert which I think will be OK with everyone.

6082: 4111: 3782: 2214:

for a project that failed to generate much buzz after the classes ended, but that project at least has the benefit of occasional faculty (and/or grad student) oversight. See

9011:. Based on that text, a good rule of thumb is "how likely is this article to be viewed by a member of the general public needing thorough coverage?" Thus the single species 8446: 8097: 5852:). I would certainly agree that it is not worth the effort. (It could be automated at some point if absolutely needed by duplicating the banners on the redirection target.) 4505:

about potentially moving "Antenna (biology)" to another page (such as "Arthropod antenna" or similar) to avoid confusion. Please comment if you have opinions on the matter.

10109: 7868:

it to others if I get on well with it. If we reach consensus to the positive, I'd be happy to encourage/disseminate amongst the few regulars at Beetles, once I've actually

474:

I will mention that many other articles requested have not had any response, but I am sure someone here will be able to copyedit my request in a reasonable amount of time.

9032: 8575: 6559: 6149:

It seems that the popular pages tool hasn't run since mid-April. It usually updates monthly, and I signed the hymenoptera task force up for it shortly after the last run (

4514: 216:

males primarily for food/nutrition, but as the article is written, it convenys the impression that obtaining lucibufagin for defense is the primary driver of predation by

8071: 7973: 7907: 6309:- in reference to the distinctive thickening of the antennae) seems as good a name as any, though various other groups of wasps also have clubbed or thickened antennae." 5509: 5328: 4165:

The HotArticlesBot subscription for your project is now active. I went ahead and added the chart to your task force page. Feel free to move it wherever you like. Cheers.

2842: 596:

Beetles. There is no reason for keeping it, since users will sign up for whatever project there is (or sub project for that matter). Look at it this way, we have roughly

9324: 8987: 6814:. The latter will get homepage exposure including a photo in a few hours. The former article isn't in good shape. It would be good if members of this project could give 6541: 6460:

Thanks very much for that article. I think the last few paragraphs are very important. It is suggested that blood feeding is so the male can provide the female with a

5577: 4155: 3986: 3554: 3437: 9847: 9799: 5459: 4895: 4877: 3385: 2806: 9918: 9301: 8930:

more inclined to make changes towards increasing rather than decreasing. What are some appropriate actions I could take if I think something is mis-graded? Thank you,

8093: 6728: 6214: 6144: 6129: 6114: 6098: 4683: 4611: 4596: 4581: 4144: 3809: 3710: 3587: 2916: 2870: 1772:. I am also saying that there should be no WikiProject Insects tag in the WikiProject Lepidoptera articles since WikiProject Lepidoptera is pretty big. Is that clear? 1620:

I agree. It would be very helpful if there could be a bot to help for this, but I've asked several owners of bots and they either outright refuse or just don't reply.

7822: 7789: 3914: 3483: 2718:

for some time, trying to make sure that all the information is relevant to the family Gryllidae, the true crickets. I proposed about ten days ago on the talk page of

2114:

which is ridiculous because I wrote so many articles and did so many constructive edits, and now the whole community accuse me of vandalism and disruptive edits??!!--

10313: 10248:, where I guess there's some uncertainty, or instability, regarding which really is the order. It still seems better to have one or the other than to have neither. - 9433: 9428: 9400: 8563: 8405: 8249: 8044: 7115: 6024: 5376: 4185: 3536: 3468: 2903:

Just thought I'd share these for anyone seeking to expand articles on entomologists. Some are biographical, while others don't contain much or any biographical data

471: 95:, as B-class. I am still not sure whether it qualifies as B or C. Please tell me so that I could change the rank if necessary. Also please use the ping feature (ex. 9101: 9085: 9062: 8748: 8524: 8503: 7858: 7844: 7700: 7686: 6410: 6200: 5245: 5217: 5137: 5075: 5060: 5046: 4939: 4272: 4006: 993:

Editors are free to create any WikiProject they like, of course, but that doesn't mean it's always a good idea, and they are not free to disrupt other WikiProjects.

647: 364: 337: 8263: 8194: 8180: 8160: 8009: 7886: 7515: 7400: 6390: 6376: 6347: 6171: 5320: 3500: 3357: 3245: 2584: 1941: 1478: 943:" advice for editors, use bots to track what is happening at articles of interest to the group, and create lists of tools and templates their members commonly use" 10252: 10227: 9827: 8730: 8203:

has a different meaning in Knowledge. All these insects would be better, in my view, to be listed under the scientific name with redirects from vernacular names.

6468: 6455: 5444: 5395: 4820: 4801: 4097: 4083: 4068: 4053: 4035: 4021: 3343: 2006: 1501:

WikiProject Insects is overused on every Insect related article (that's why WikiProject Lepidoptera decided not to use it, since it already have 88,839 articles).

1215:

consensus to be removing the Insect banner right now, so if we are going to be removing the Insects banner, this project simply needs to reach consensus on that.

978: 395: 10294: 10101: 9774: 8393: 8332: 7385: 6286: 6177: 6163: 5480: 5340: 5324: 4769: 4413: 4352: 4337: 4323: 4304: 4290: 3787: 2811: 2494: 1922: 575: 556: 126: 125:

I'm pretty reluctant to tag articles as B-class, so I usually look for reasons why an article might fail to be B-class. The assessment guidelines for B-class at

10043: 9673: 9658: 9535: 8770: 7808: 6535: 5624: 5609: 5450:

If you do want to make a Bombus-specific template, we'd need articles on the bumblebee colony lifecycle, diseases of bumble bees, domesticated bemblebees, etc.

4666: 4545: 3862:

Thanks, that's very helpful (and alarming). So that other editors can be clear on what has happened, the text has effectively been parameterized so that it says

3725: 3230: 2858:

presentations which clearly stated they view this as the #1short-term threat to UK biodiversity: I cannot post because this is first-hand reporting on my part.

1547:

Unfortunately, user Kingofaces43 listens to only one side (his own), and convinces other editors to follow his suit blindly which in my opinion is misleading.--

499: 304: 10073: 8965: 8554:

Good catch; I should proofread better when talking about typographical errors! I have amended my post above to indicate the correct dates (all in the 1800's).

8542: 8352: 8308: 6430: 5932: 4652: 3582:

After a recent request, I added WikiProject Insects/ant task force to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by

3258: 10170: 9212: 9194: 8757:

I concur. Honestly, I don't think it should be on the automatic taxobox either -- it causes unnecessary confusion because of the articles that list phylum as

5947: 4398: 4383: 3967: 3945: 3833: 3372: 2693: 2171: 2141: 2123: 2055: 1868: 1463: 1422: 1309: 1287: 1224: 1200: 1178: 1144: 1122: 918: 897: 882: 852: 830: 680: 628: 613: 10136: 8817:

organisation of the project page and keep updating it when necessary, so the main project pages should be fairly up to scratch. Today, with the promotion of

7549: 7285: 7252: 7199: 6487:

Can anyone identify the binomial authorities, and either link them to articles or turn the links into redlinks? I haven't been able to find their paper. (1)

4102:

All articles are now as they were before the August changes, but with intervening edits restored. Please let me know if you notice anything that looks awry.

2866: 2771: 2664: 2599: 2462: 2382: 2352: 2291: 2094: 2080: 1962: 1844: 1781: 1752: 1643: 1556: 133:. Arthropod B-class says article can be missing an important section, while the Grading scheme says B-class shouldn't have any "obvious omissions". I'd call 10199: 9718: 9344: 9020: 8293: 7221: 6620: 5861: 5651: 5595: 5414: 5305: 5273: 5199: 5150: 5031: 3160: 3138: 3074: 2678: 2561: 2539: 2524: 2040: 1323:

When it comes to these articles, people are generally going to be interested in insects in general, so we should try to maintain that overarching connection

1052: 411: 9412: 8076: 6756: 5292: 4924: 4858: 3630: 1885: 1571: 435: 10067: 9611:

Concerning nomenclature, we follow the proposal of Sabrosky (1999: 211), who justified in a long note the adoption of the name Nemopalpus over Nemapalpus.

8710: 8683: 7364: 6086: 4211:

page (which is/was a stub) for a university project. I left most of the text that had already been contributed but I will be adding quite a bit. Thanks!

4196: 3927:

It seems that the editor skipped those few articles of better known species which already had some content, and focused on the majority of empty articles.

3557:? We're discussing whether or not a particular butterfly species which is the subject of an article actually exists or has been misidentified. Thanks. 1709: 1629: 229: 162: 147: 10279: 9519: 9406: 6714: 6316:(I hope this comment is in the right place; on the Talk page for Sapygidae it suggests taking part in the insects discussion rather than talking there). 6035: 5723: 5536:

by Radchenko in 1989 and then given a new replacement name in 2015 (including a new author citation, 'Ward, Brady, Fisher & Schultz, 2015'). Or the

3449: 1104: 757: 735: 332: 10097: 9788: 8223: 8142: 8050: 7098: 6327: 6252: 6205:

The bot had good timing. AWB was actually going to make things tricky for a few cases I was trying, and I decided to just put work down for the night.

5016: 4903: 2642: 2620: 1827: 1806: 1731: 8939: 8739:. Let's not throw thousands of articles, and over a hundred years of conventional wisdom, into unfamiliar chaos simply because one paper suggests so. 5036:

I like the idea of having the rest of the seven article types for the WikiProject. It's difficult to find templates or project pages amongst the : -->

3654: 3348:

That's the kind of source I like to see. Seems like ants are always a group needing more taxonomic commentary for how often some naming is changing.

2669:

Also, even were the block not in place, it's best not to respond to condescending comments that are worded to enflame or guilt. Don't take that bait.

2108:

You should come and read this so that you will know that user Kingofaces43 wants to be his way only. Furthermore, I am now being accused of not being

9905: 8978:. I'll apply them to some of the New Zealand species, which have high cultural importance, especially to Māori, but are currently rated Low. Thanks! 5764:

own subcategories. If there is sufficient interest, subcategories for other groups of organisms could be added (it certainly doesn't hurt to include

5683: 4493: 4174: 3119: 2898: 2766: 9976: 9008: 7956:

for an example). Would you be willing to give these taxoboxes a try? Their code is much shorter than the traditional ones as you only need to write

7014: 6401:

There doesn't seem to be much of an English name for them, but "Sapygid Wasp" gets around 1000 hits on Google, so there is some precedent for that.

5831: 4868:), but didn't get any new comments. I'm for a merger. If you want to merge the two, I'm happy to put my !vote on either discussion page in support. 1428:

blow them off when it comes to removing tags. Also, there's no need to re-ping people. Either they decided not to reply, or haven't been online yet.

10158: 9931: 8643: 3328: 3198: 821:. As I stated above some editors already started to tag insect articles for endemism, so in this case it will be 3 tags, and it will be too much.-- 9419:. Presumably these should be merged. I don't know the best way to do this, though, so I figured I'd just bring it to others' attention. :) Thanks 9176: 8622:' as i was working on some Indian village articles of that name. I came across references to a beetle called the 'Ravet' in a few sources such as 7605: 7047: 6868:

is a start-up academic journal which aims to provide a new mechanism for ensuring the accuracy of Knowledge's scientific content. It is part of a

5799: 9376: 6744: 6519: 5258: 4748: 4565: 7174: 2892: 1297: 1095:

disruption will end. If not for this debate, I would have finished it and began editing the articles so that wouldn't be a one-sentence stubs.--

244:

After a recent request, I added WikiProject Insects to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by

7149: 6955: 6767: 5640: 5559: 5519: 4808: 4790: 4736: 4328:

I went through and tagged everything relevant above. The Hymenoptera articles will still need class and importance categorizations eventually.

3572: 795: 522: 9953: 8358:

because too few people know about the organism for a common name to gain traction. One such problem, to pick one from my area of expertise is

4657:

The implicit criterion is simply, are there enough people who want to work in the task force? The smaller the taxon, the less likely that is.

4132: 2085:

I agree entirely on that front too. I just wouldn't want to see indiscriminate task forces. But to keep them focused exactly as you laid out.

7936: 7733: 6793: 6076: 5869: 4219: 3106: 1686: 138:

technical jargon should be avoided). And what about their larval stage? Adults don't feed, so what do the larvae eat and where do they live?

9838:

No problem, glad to have your input. Now all that remains is actually redirecting/deleting the thing. I'm leaning towards deletion for now.

7033:

on what details of the type description should be included in the article. Further opinions are needed to give clarity on how to proceed.--

6833: 6724: 6508: 4231: 3177:

studies social insects and teaches a course on behavioral ecology. Students in the course created/expanded articles on social insects under

1953:

I agree exactly with what you are saying. If WikiProject Beetles prospers, then we can revisit. For now, I agree with the course of action.

1614: 460: 10009: 9134: 7747: 7487: 5982: 5841: 3612: 3491:, thanks for finding the copyvio. I tried several phrases in Google, but maybe because of the format it didn't pick it up. It's gone now.— 3218: 2260: 2188: 76: 64: 59: 2828:

that relies on a web search API from Yahoo. It checks individual edits rather than just new articles. Please take 15 seconds to visit the

2206: 2110: 1990: 1981:

would be listed with the Insects banner, but we'd include the task force within that template. Maybe something to consider in the future.

10090:). The latter page shows that the last segment of the antennae of Lagria hirta is smaller than those shown on the Lagria hirta picture. 9898: 9688: 8953: 8903: 7541: 6611:

I finished the translation, I rely on you guys to make sure my English writing is as close as possible of the Shakespeare's language. ;)

6416: 5815: 4782: 4728: 3124: 2245: 1835:

same point. At that point in time I still wouldn't be 100% on replacing the tag, but I for one would definitely be more open to it then.

274: 249: 8898:(two of which are Stubs, two are Starts, and one is C). The second is the ongoing improvement of a single species page to GA status. As 8618:

Hi, sorry if this is the wrong place to ask a question, i couldn't find a noticeboard. I've created a disambiguation page for the name '

7799:

it). Discussion of this should happen; I raised the issue at WP:PLANTS a few weeks ago. Thanks M. A. Broussard for bringing it up here.

6443: 4357:

And thanks for the inspiration. I was energized to go through all the smaller orders and tag articles with WikiProject Insects. Between

4295:

Thanks, I was just going off of Mishae's contribution list, so I didn't know about that tool. I'll take up those articles too in a bit.

909:

The opposition is one (you). Either way, I already stated my point. Lets wait till other folks will join this discussion. Sounds fair?--

112: 8822: 6719: 6605: 6515: 5698: 10307:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Tree of Life#Request for comments: Should the automatic taxobox system be the current recommended practice?

8919: 7998:

but Leptoglossus phyllopus seems to have much more info available about it. One or both pages could use some clarification/updates.

6053: 4256: 510:

I've been seeing some people removing the WikiProject Insect tag from article talk pages and replacing with the specific order (e.g.,

483: 10115: 5234: 2739: 2071:

task force (come on, it is the largest animal family, how can it not have a taskforce), bees taskforce and maybe Mantodea taskforce.

279: 6987: 6010: 4529: 3997:

to the rest of the genus as a whole - then we should of course correct it. Can you point to any sources that contradict it, please?

9606:, citing Sabrosky, C.W., Thompson, F.C. & Evenhius, N.E. 1999. Family-group names in Diptera and bibliography. Myia 10: 1–576: 9281: 7640: 6838: 6596:, a small rove beetle from the Philippines. Would someone be interested and kind enough to proofread the English language? Thanks, 5849: 5230: 4525: 3041: 511: 3665: 2754:

Infact, there were zero opposes (except for one, but the user later withdrew this) and had two supports, one of which was myself.

9744:, what seems to basically be the original ref (updated 22 October 2013, so only a year after consulted) for the article, showing 9227: 8596: 5313: 4786: 1873: 10186: 6917:

Knowledge articles that you are willing to see through external peer review (either solo or as in a group, process analagous to

2799: 2431:, which can apply to either removal or addition of any template. You may be referring to "Overtagging is disruptive" section of 2128:

I highly suggest rereading what I said and not misrepresent what I said in such an adversarial manner. Again, please follow the

10132:

Not sure if this is the right place to ask, but I figured someone here might know. Thanks in advance for any insights/advice. -

9007:

as Plantdrew stated, it's largely haphazard and often arbitrary. Some projects have explanatory guidelines for importance: see

8659: 7243:

The article is definitely improved, but you do seem to be getting a bit in over your head on taxonomy. I'll take a stab at it.

6230: 4536:

to the non-ant Hymenoptera pages already having the WikiProject Insects tag. If anyone has any objections, please let me know!

4519: 439: 9790:

It's part of a "Nomenclatural Studies Toward a World List of Diptera Genus-Group Names" series of articles if you're unaware.

9707:

What's the best course of action to take if it really is a genus name that never existed? Deletion, or redirect to Adejeania?

6869: 5174: 9416: 8599:

for more details, including the list of species, and to register. Remote participants from all around the world are welcome!

7531: 7320: 6566:

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

5505: 3236:

semester. Probably better to make sure they are using the appropriate course pages instead while starting a task force here.

2308: 2304: 1768:

the Wikiproject Insects tag should be added, but if WikiProject Beetles substantially grows, then it should be removed. Only

4602:

are enough people (and work) to make the task force worthwhile instead of creating taskforces for the sake of taxonomy too.

664: 10271: 8372: 8314: 8089: 7448: 7443: 6381:

Ah I see where the confusion was. That's for participating in the project itself, not so much on article specific content.

6049: 5080:

If you want redirs too you need to go the subpage route, but you still have two broad choices, governed by what you put in

4724: 2874: 2335:. A handy trick for narrowing even further is to modify the url to include the word you're seeking, e.g. to go straight to 1504:

If we will use 2-3 tags (plus 1 for articles where species are endemic to a specific nation or territory), we will violate

309: 1091:

So in this case, the sooner we will rename beetle articles from WikiProject Insects to WikiProject Beetles the sooner the

867:

We have zillions of articles on insects and its hard to find in this template what you are looking for even alphabetically

9679: 8844: 7452: 7340:

or anyone else, I was wondering if you know which species of bee is in this photo or if you know someone who would know:

6691: 6653: 4828: 4160: 3883:

takes pollen and nectar to its nest to create a "bee loaf" (saliva, pollen and nectar).<ref name="ForestService"/: -->

8299:

won't help. We always provide taxon names in the lead, in taxoboxes and if need be in redirects, and that's sufficient.

5253: 2923:

Wade, J. S. (1928). "A Bibliography of Biographies of Entomologists, with Special Reference to North American Workers".

8788: 8784: 8689: 8634:. The sources say it is a maylfy/cock-chaffer type beetle from Guadaloupe, the latter source suggested it is a type of 8103: 8005: 5675: 4918: 3431: 2274: 2215: 47: 17: 7669:) or if there merely appears to be a black spot due to short yellow hairs showing the black exoskeleton through them ( 7074: 6464:

of salt. We have all seen photos of butterflies swarming over salt licks, so this explanation is at least plausible.

4556:

opinions about having it be a subset of Project Insects, like the ants team, or should it remain its own WikiProject?

3408:, female? It is from Galápagos, Ecuador. I don't expect a Pantala perch this way. Long anal appendages also favours '' 1327:

I don't see any reason to exclude the insect banner from any insect page since that's where the community really lies.

10105: 9919:

article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject

9808:

came from. Maybe a typo or mis-scan in O'Hara? However seems very safe to say this page can deleted or redirected to

9456: 8924: 8872: 7708: 7586: 7435: 7019: 6292: 3993:

where such information is available. If you feel it is more urgent, please feel free to remove it immediately anyway.

3905:, which it doesn't. Therefore all 3 paragraphs of material added to all the species articles are misleading nonsense. 3017: 2999: 443: 9502: 9315:

took the photo at Bristol Zoo. Presumably the zoo had this on a label somewhere; perhaps it has now been corrected?

6853: 5331:). I'm unfamiliar with mass-deletion requests, and thought I might raise the issue here before pursuing that route. 10262: 9937:

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the

9878: 9329:

The specialists of the Orthopterist's Society on Facebook have identified the one that landed on the footballer as

9282: 7052: 6548: 4470:

ASP accounts available to experienced Wikipedians through this partnership. To apply for free access, please go to

3042: 2332: 1491:

that project is a exception? I believe that WikiProject Insects should disappear from WikiProject Beetles because:

6908: 6747:

but help is needed with adding the photographs to articles and Wikidata. See the category for help suggestion. --

129:(which are linked by the Insect and Beetle project banners) are quite a bit more liberal than the general ones at 9352: 8858: 7069:

At some point, people started making memes out of this about Donald Trump related to appendage size. There's now

7007: 4781:

I'm late to the party, but by "cross-listed", do you mean categorizing eg ant articles needing attention in both

4446: 3586:

but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at

3421: 3165: 3096: 3069: 2744: 248:

but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at

9572: 8171:

was undergoing its GA review, it was forcibly changed to "Black bean aphid", a move which I did not approve of.

7813:

Yes, this was unrelated to that move request, which I am only now aware of. Thanks for the heads up about that.

7665:--the difference is whether or not the spot on the top of the thorax is actually due to black hairs on the bee ( 6939: 6935: 6056:

as a proof of concept, any thoughts, feedback or endorsements (on the Meta page) would be greatly appreciated.

2798:. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion 2340: 9958: 9297: 9272: 8983: 8604: 8515:

Thanks for looking into this. I'll take another look at the two pages and see if I figure out what to do next.

8463:, but unfortunately it requires a subscription to view pages. The source of your confusion is that the species 8328: 7057:

Unfortunately, it looks like we have another unfortunate insect overlap with a controversial topic (similar to

6496: 5688: 5659: 4735:. Since the attention category is used relatively sparingly, this should be fine. What do you guys think about 3380:

File:Libélula (Tramea sp), Cerro Brujo, isla de San Cristóbal, islas Galápagos, Ecuador, 2015-07-24, DD 147.jpg

3178: 2552:

not removing the tag. I maybe don't know how consensus works, but in my opinion it should never be one sided.--

2211: 7457: 6675:

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

5051:

Consider adding another custom class for redirects? There are a few hundred redirects with an insects banner.

9069: 8678: 7306:. More that opinions, we need sources that claim whether bees are domesticated or not. Thanks for your help. 7137: 6050:

I'm designing a tool for Visual Editor to make it easy for people to add open license text from other sources

5748: 5226: 5122: 4732: 3636: 3280: 3268: 1601:

and its subcategories that are tagged for WikiProject Insects and not for WikiProject Beetles. And there are

9335:. Comparison with museum specimens on Commons suggests that the image from Arpingstone is the same species. 7631:

I really know embarrassingly little about bumblebees. Any idea what this is? It's in Michigan, last summer.

5710: 2854:

Can some of the specialists review this page, please? I've noted comments on the Talk page reporting two UK

10154: 9507: 9397: 9139: 9119: 8878:

Moving forward there are two on-going tasks: one is to improve the articles for the Coleopteran sub-orders

8349: 8290: 7521: 7123: 7044: 6007: 5289: 4948: 4837:. There is certainly scope for expansion, suggestions welcomed. There is currently no good parent article: 4766: 4723:- Hello Ant Task Force! I have been working on getting Hymenoptera Task Force up and running and have been 4636: 4227: 3548: 3182: 2847: 2303:

are you saying one of the reasons you want to divide articles into new projects is so that categories like

1268: 1258: 9924:

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

9741: 3738: 1970: 9948: 9050: 8434: 7469: 4834: 4202: 4107: 4093: 4049: 4041: 4002: 2325: 1384: 840:"if a WikiProject says that an article is within their scope, then do not edit-war to remove the banner." 705: 9500:?) to accompany. Polbot was doubtless driven by IUCN. Any idea which is correct? Fauna Europaea favours 7343: 6874: 6338:

of the source. I think we're fine just not mentioning anything about English common names in this case.

4460: 3680: 933:

Stepping back from what has been said so far, there are several purposes or functions to a WikiProject.

9732:, but I'm skeptical. The first book has a preview mode which allows one to search the book and see the 9440:

Knowledge talk:WikiProject Tree of Life#Request for comment: categorizing by year of formal description

7774: 7754: 7029: 6168:

The pages that were supposed to be tagged by the bot, and I still stand by the assessment, were these:

4244: 1859:

the agreement will be reached. Plus, I will be blocked sooner or later because of your meat puppetry.--

38: 9256:. A vote of confidence from the Knowledge community will make a big difference to the grant's success. 6864: 6840: 5142:

Oh, so that's why we have less classes. Adding all of them plus redirects seems like the best option.

9981: 9649:

So... I'm not sure if there's agreement on whether the original spelling is correct or incorrect....

9442:

for a discussion on possible guidelines for categorizing by year of formal description of a species.

9293: 9268: 8994: 8979: 8705: 8600: 8559: 8499: 8389: 8245: 8039: 7969: 7932: 7903: 7854: 7818: 7729: 7682: 7511: 7276:

Having gone from Start to B, I'd love to see this through to GA. Any further suggestions appreciated.

6282: 6196: 6125: 6094: 5719: 5501: 5476: 5455: 5336: 5213: 5071: 5042: 4873: 4816: 4744: 4679: 4592: 4561: 4541: 4510: 2829: 2817: 2787: 940:"as resources to help coordinate and organize the group's efforts at creating and improving articles" 360: 10210:

It's all very tricky at present, since there's no real consensus on how to classify insects, as per

9307:

I'm not having any luck finding any sources that mention this name (aside from Knowledge scrapers).

7994:

are named as the "Florida leaf-footed bug" in their pages. Acanthocephala femorata claims the page

7780:? Might be sensible to see how the move proposal plays out (and to direct relevant comments there). 5346:

Agreed, and these templates are impossible to maintain. There are three ant templates of this type:

3642: 2816:

A new copy-paste detection bot is now in general use on English Knowledge. Come check it out at the

2067:

I agree with you. However, some large or notable task forces should be made. For instance, maybe an

10275: 10267: 9843: 9795: 9714: 8716:

I don't think there was any discussion that lead to a consensus for that. It's apparently based on

8642:. Does anybody know where i can find the article on this specific beetle? I was hoping to create a 7424: 6798: 6672:

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

6576: 3650: 3577: 3532: 3464: 1001:

I doubt that WT:Insects would be swamped by all the discussions that currently occur at WT:Beetles.

505: 84: 6491:

links to a DAB page, and is a common Chinese surname. (2) I have my doubts as to whether botanist

3673: 10223: 10039: 9515: 9447: 9393: 9360: 9353: 9097: 9058: 8838: 8304: 8259: 8190: 8156: 8067: 8058:

There is a new discussion of the appropriate title for the article (Grasshopper vs Caelifera) at

8021: 7995: 7991: 7912: 7720: 7111: 6761: 6451: 6406: 6067: 5440: 5387:

Imo, they're not really that useful for small (tiny) genera, and not practical for large genera.

4891: 4854: 4662: 4550: 4247:

discussion. This might potentially blow up some watchlists, so I just wanted to let people know.

3963: 3910: 3829: 3699: 3440:

will soon be deleted as stale unless someone takes an interest in it. Is this a notable topic? —

130: 9787:

Also for quick reference, the Evenhuis et al 2015 ref I referred to can be found here as a PDF:

8199:

Well, I call these "blackfly" when I find them on my beans, and this is a widely used name. But

7070: 5747:

The vast majority of organism related redirects don't have project banners on their talk pages.

1593:

I'd like to point out there while are now 9,943 pages tagged for WikiProject Beetles, there are

1237:

to this. Just because I was here for a while doesn't mean that I was engaged in every activity.

9912:

RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace

9364: 8818: 8793: 8116: 8110: 7987: 7465: 7396: 7303: 7094: 6492: 6478: 6386: 6343: 6210: 6140: 6110: 5953: 5679: 5528: 4607: 4577: 4455: 4409: 4333: 4300: 4268: 4252: 4103: 4089: 4045: 3998: 3792: 3479: 3353: 3241: 2795: 2660: 2580: 2137: 2090: 2051: 1986: 1918: 1840: 1748: 1639: 1459: 1305: 1220: 1118: 893: 848: 791: 643: 624: 571: 518: 456: 298: 239: 9691:" was apparently created in 2012 by Simuliid, apparently as a genus of tachinid flies, but... 10181: 10143: 10126: 10122: 9972: 9938: 9496: 9490: 9234: 9208: 9172: 9081: 9028: 9015:, with widespread economic, cultural, and biological interest is of a higher importance than 8866: 8744: 8122: 7785: 7601: 7439: 7381: 7082: 7062: 6810: 6789: 6777: 6710: 6504: 6372: 6323: 5943: 5671: 5605: 5582: 5537: 5435:, we could include links to topics like pollination and brood parasitism to assist visitors. 4483: 4437: 3765:

Knowledge:Featured picture candidates/A butterfly feeding on the tears of a turtle in Ecuador

3496: 3445: 3339: 3324: 3226: 3115: 2912: 2762: 2674: 2458: 2400: 2369: 2348: 2341:

https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Category:WikiProject_Beetles_articles&from=Carabus

2315: 2256: 2241: 1937: 1505: 1474: 1330: 934: 668: 634: 479: 425: 290: 9748:

with the same species, authority, and type species. It looks like like Simuliid also added "

8059: 7405:

I work specialize in pollinators, and I am absolutely certain that, given the locale, it is

6523: 4628:

in general? That would make a good task force name, because everyone knows what a bee is. I

3129:

I would like to identify this two insects mating, photographed in Slovenia, Europe. Thanx --

2971:

Carpenter, Mathilde M. (1953). "Bibliography of Biographies of Entomologists (Supplement)".

347: 10285:

I took the liberty of creating a quick stub for now -- I'll leave the expansion to others.

10093: 9804:

I think you are correct. As James E. O'Hara (2009) is not online anymore, I cant say where

9331: 8935: 8555: 8538: 8510: 8495: 8385: 8241: 8219: 8176: 8138: 8085: 8001: 7965: 7928: 7899: 7864: 7850: 7814: 7725: 7678: 7507: 7461: 7359: 6585: 6278: 6192: 6121: 6090: 6042:

Looking for feedback on a tool on Visual Editor to add open license text from other sources

5978: 5715: 5497: 5493: 5472: 5451: 5332: 5209: 5167: 5067: 5038: 4869: 4812: 4776: 4740: 4675: 4588: 4557: 4537: 4506: 4370: 4215: 2862: 2848: 2735: 2535: 2490: 2002: 1078: 974: 356: 353: 8529:

Broussard, shouldn't that be Panzer 1810, not 1910, then? In any case, the date given for

6651:

message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the

6269:. For a better (potentially even species-level) identification, I would post the photo on 1296:. This is looking like a very adversarial approach you're taking, so I'm going to let the 8: 10321: 10166: 9839: 9791: 9710: 9586:

Macquart 1839, see Duckhouse and Lewis, 1980; Alexander, 1987; Quate and Alexander, 2000)

9320: 8961: 8852: 8821:

to GA status, we've hit a new milestone of 5 - yes 5! - articles at that status and I've

8811: 8766: 8726: 8591: 8520: 8442: 7943: 7840: 7804: 7740: 7696: 7661: 7636: 7593: 7569:

The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

7248: 7170: 6890: 6827: 6701: 6572: 6531: 6159: 5987: 5904: 5827: 5795: 5620: 5591: 5410: 5269: 5195: 5133: 5056: 5027: 4842: 4838: 4394: 4379: 4348: 4319: 4286: 4277:

There are still 3042 articles with a WikiProject Beetles tag and no WikiProject Insects (

4208: 3646: 3595: 3528: 3488: 3460: 3418: 3206: 3194: 3066: 2888: 2825: 2791: 2772: 2450: 2432: 2411: 2279: 1977: 1881: 1610: 1567: 1495: 835: 552: 495: 407: 346:(specialized forum on insects from France) or check directly on their picture gallery at 328: 257: 225: 143: 9288:

Hi, could someone verify the taxonomy in this article? Trying to figure out if the name

8479:

was described by Born in 1813, which is probably where the third date came from. As for

8313:

Sigh. My ideal would be for use of scientific names exclusively, however we have rules (

5427:

In the main, Plantdrew must be right. There is a case, however, for popular genera like

955:

One final point: I would argue that article count is a very poor guide to the amount of

10309:. Inviting anybody who watches this page to contribute their thoughts to that thread. 10219: 10050:

Thank you, that looks more like it. It is sometimes hard to see the difference between

10035: 9822: 9588: 9511: 9443: 9093: 9054: 8915: 8834: 8701: 8322: 8300: 8255: 8186: 8152: 8063: 8035: 7940: 7882: 7737: 7503: 7483: 7281: 7217: 7195: 7145: 7107: 6631: 6616: 6601: 6592: 6447: 6402: 6183: 6063: 5883: 5436: 4887: 4850: 4658: 4362: 3959: 3906: 3846: 3825: 3684: 3603: 3565: 2980: 2960: 2838: 1336: 265: 190:

is certainly an important topic to cover (which again, should also be mentioned on the

8533:(1813) does not correspond with the category (1832), or rather the reverse situation. 7527: 6914:

Original articles on topics that don't yet have a Knowledge page, or only a stub/start

5204:

Sorry, I guess I got a bit over-excited. I'll undo the ones I've put in, and take out

4369:

there are around 500 insect taxon articles that don't have an insect project tag yet.

2482:

The number of articles involved (either existing or potential) is entirely irrelevant.

2427:, and so not really pertinent to Wiki Projects, although note that it also alludes to 1908:

so far, it seems folks would prefer to leave the Insects tag. Wikiproject Beetles can

10290: 10195: 10063: 10005: 9990: 9982: 9770: 9669: 9654: 9531: 9424: 9372: 9340: 9190: 9154: 9012: 8802: 8674: 8655: 7849:

I have left a note at WP Beetles and WP Lepidoptera so they can join the discussion.

7392: 7327: 7090: 6679: 6382: 6339: 6206: 6136: 6106: 6032: 5929: 5857: 5648: 5567: 5392: 5302: 5242: 5147: 4936: 4798: 4649: 4603: 4573: 4495: 4405: 4329: 4296: 4264: 4248: 4193: 4170: 3982: 3721: 3627: 3475: 3369: 3349: 3255: 3237: 3028: 3014: 2996: 2689: 2656: 2576: 2512:

The number of articles involved (either existing or potential) is entirely irrelevant

2404: 2396: 2148: 2133: 2086: 2062: 2047: 2021: 1982: 1948: 1914: 1853: 1836: 1759: 1744: 1678: 1635: 1455: 1368: 1316: 1301: 1293: 1250: 1231: 1216: 1129: 1114: 904: 889: 859: 844: 803: 787: 689: 658: 639: 620: 582: 567: 514: 447: 391: 295: 178: 10270:

is a new type of species of wasp with it's a big sting needs article to be created.

9964: 9642: 8185:

Sorry to hear that. But it seems to be quite a widely-used name, without conflicts?

6740: 5666: 9996: 9968: 9857: 9638: 9613: 9568: 9310: 9204: 9200: 9168: 9077: 9024: 8862: 8740: 8344: 8285: 7781: 7764: 7655: 7597: 7431: 7377: 7078: 7039: 6967: 6785: 6752: 6706: 6500: 6368: 6319: 6248: 6002: 5939: 5919: 5601: 5555: 5284: 5015:

on pages that are in Draft talk: space - it'll be detected automatically, see e.g.

4970: 4962: 4761: 4718: 4479: 4366: 4223: 4135:. No reason to keep this, it needs to appear once at the genus page and that's it. 3518: 3492: 3441: 3335: 3320: 3307: 3288: 3222: 3156: 3134: 3111: 2932: 2908: 2758: 2719: 2715: 2709: 2670: 2616: 2557: 2520: 2454: 2378: 2359: 2344: 2287: 2268: 2252: 2237: 2167: 2119: 2036: 1933: 1864: 1802: 1727: 1694: 1598: 1552: 1485: 1470: 1418: 1360: 1283: 1196: 1174: 1140: 1100: 1048: 1030: 914: 878: 826: 753: 731: 676: 609: 475: 465: 282: 198:

using lucibufagin to protect against jumping spiders is marginally relevant to the

92: 85: 9411:

Hi, I just noticed there are two categories that seem to be doing the same thing:

597: 10079: 9733: 9002: 8947: 8931: 8899: 8895: 8761:, and there's no way those will all need to be fixed just because of some paper. 8549: 8534: 8429: 8413: 8204: 8172: 8134: 7610: 7414: 7351: 7311: 7077:) should not be included. There are issues with policy such as ignoring sources, 6885:

Since it is just starting out, it is looking for contributors in two main areas:

6781: 6335: 6266: 5974: 5965: 5897: 4883: 4846: 4711: 4238: 4140: 4079: 4064: 4031: 4017: 3941: 3805: 3181:

last year, and will be working on Apidae this year (with a recently created page

2731: 2638: 2595: 2546: 2531: 2501: 2486: 2428: 2076: 2013: 1998: 1958: 1823: 1777: 1705: 1670: 1625: 1352: 1086: 1074: 1014: 985: 970: 379: 158: 108: 8829:. FA status remains elusive, but a serious and potential goal for this project. 7927:

This is a general problem at wikipedia - sometimes very hard to look thru. Rgds

46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

10317: 10249: 10162: 10133: 9316: 9259:

If you have suggestions or think there's something missing, make a note on its

9130: 8975: 8957: 8848: 8762: 8722: 8516: 8454: 8438: 8423: 8407: 8359: 7873: 7836: 7800: 7692: 7648: 7632: 7407: 7372: 7271: 7244: 7206: 7184: 7166: 6822: 6527: 6480: 6439: 6155: 5955: 5823: 5791: 5632: 5616: 5587: 5406: 5262: 5188: 5126: 5052: 5020: 4974: 4928: 4390: 4375: 4358: 4344: 4315: 4282: 3778: 3413: 3364:

Great find, Animalparty! Our subfamily articles are in dire need of expansion.

3190: 3061: 3057: 2884: 1877: 1794: 1654: 1606: 1563: 1275: 1244: 991:

and you are right, have over 32% of articles that are above stub class. As for

601: 590: 548: 491: 403: 324: 221: 139: 10000:

and is the same picture as in that article. I don't have a replacement photo.

9562:

is the original spelling of the genus and has priority over the commonly used

8114:, for which we have a stub article. However this common name is also given to 6736: 5471:

I will look into mass-deletion, since the group generally seems to be for it.

4755:

least, antweb is creative commons released so finding images is much easier.--

3079: 2515:

live it as it is now (half like this, half like that), until I will be back.--

9930:

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the

9896:

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members

9815: 9761: 9145: 9016: 8911: 8613: 8318: 7878: 7479: 7277: 7238: 7213: 7191: 7156: 7141: 6773: 6693: 6659:

that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

6612: 6597: 5970: 5887: 4472: 3619: 3600: 3558: 2834: 2803: 2162:

to know that you have adversarial behavior toward me, and that's the truth.--

2129: 2068: 1211: 262: 10087: 10086:) appears to be in line with the description of Lagria atipes that I found ( 6972: 2936: 2311:

have fewer entries? They are already navigable by alphabetical order due to

1818:

I didn't mean size of articles. I meant the number of contributing editors.

10286: 10211: 10191: 10059: 10017: 10001: 9766: 9665: 9650: 9527: 9475: 9420: 9368: 9336: 9230:

to bring articles on some iconic NZ insects up to Good or Featured status.

9186: 8883: 8798: 8668: 8651: 7335: 7132: 7066:

genital features, and females possess only a few setae in their genitalia.

6922: 6918: 6461: 6028: 5925: 5853: 5704: 5644: 5600:

Oh yes, so would this mean it is better to use its first description date?

5563: 5388: 5298: 5238: 5143: 4978: 4966: 4958: 4932: 4794: 4697: 4645: 4189: 4181: 4166: 4150: 3978: 3717: 3623: 3365: 3314: 3251: 3214: 3172: 3053: 3049: 2685: 2421: 1400: 1344: 1239:

a fair number of folks here are concerned about removing the Insects banner

1006: 721: 667:, where it clearly says that over tagging is disruptive, which means screw 387: 98: 9704:, given the species names, the authority and apparently even the synonym. 9617: 8825:. Four of these have been promoted during 2017, including the top article 6956:"WikiJournal of Medicine, the first Knowledge-integrated academic journal" 6928:

Image articles, based around an important medical image or summary diagram

6590:

Hello all, I intend to translate from French to English the article about

5488:

Knowledge:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2016_April_17#Insect genus navboxes

4374:

remaining insect taxa is on my to-do list, but a low priority at present.

314: 9485: 9182: 9161: 8339: 8280: 8167: 8052: 7920: 7034: 6748: 6422: 6260: 6244: 6018: 5997: 5915: 5908: 5279: 5278:

LOL, Damn, it looks like my fossil ants are causing a lot of problems!!--

4756: 4704: 3747: 3300: 3292: 3152: 3143: 3130: 3083: 2756:

I might go and post this to the FL talk page so I can get more responses.

2627: 2612: 2553: 2516: 2389: 2374: 2366:

Even alphabetically it is hard to navigate through a vast list of insects

2298: 2283: 2163: 2115: 2032: 1860: 1813: 1798: 1723: 1662: 1548: 1414: 1392: 1279: 1192: 1185: 1170: 1163: 1136: 1096: 1044: 1022: 910: 874: 822: 749: 727: 713: 672: 605: 9967:

which needs expert input (and someone who knows how to edit a taxobox).

9591: 9392:

They were almost certainly dupes, so I've redirected one to the other. ♠

8338:

the pages should be at the taxon name, not on an arbitrary vernacular.--

7555:

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

3273:

Just came across this CC-licensed article- could be useful in improving

10305:

There is an RfC regarding recommending usage of automatic taxoboxes at

10241: 10149: 9757: 9736:

and no such name exists. I think you're right that it's supposed to be

9480: 9470: 9073: 8376: 7953: 7307: 4789:? That would't be an issue at all, more likely a good thing. Regarding 4136: 4075: 4060: 4027: 4013: 3937: 3816: 3801: 3598:. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! 2983: 2963: 2648: 2634: 2606: 2591: 2157: 2103: 2072: 1954: 1819: 1788: 1773: 1716: 1701: 1621: 1408: 1376: 1038: 697: 260:. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! 154: 120: 104: 8779:

Use of Category:Insects described in ____ for species with nomina nova

5879: 1469:

beetle or moth article would incorporate the Wikiproject Insects tag.

9810: 9753: 9700: 9126: 8891: 8887: 8695: 8200: 7058: 6298: 3845:

is a link to the list of edits (it continues on the next pages), and

3796: 3773: 3662:

I made a side by side comparison with the pic and images of specimens

3011:

A compendium of the biographical literature on deceased entomologists

2945: 2723: 431: 9221:

Wikipedian at Large grant proposal needs volunteers and endorsements

4985:. But if the WikiProject just wants to add Draft and no others, add 10245: 9730:

Catalogue of Palaearctic Diptera: Athericidae - Asilidae - Volume 5

8879: 8380: 7370:

I'm not absolutely certain but appears to be the common honey bee,

6816: 6804: 3977:

Gidip is entirely correct and all the additions should be reverted

3087: 2821: 2727: 204: 10030:– it appears more likely to be correct, although my experience of 9245:

button and summarise your background and what you'd be keen to do.

8279:

name, making them very odd exceptions as the encyclopedia grows.--

6151:

Knowledge:WikiProject Insects/Hymenoptera task force/Popular pages

2652: 9167:

tagged the link. Can one of you experts help solve this problem?

7536: 6934:

If you're interested, please come and discuss the project on the

6554:

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

4621: 4616:

Task forces seems to be generally favored over wikiprojects (see

3661: 3553:

Could some editors with background in this kind of thing join us

10301:

Request for comment on recommending usage of automatic taxoboxes

10080:

https://en.wikipedia.org/File:Tenebrionidae_-_Lagria_hirta-2.JPG

9632:. Sabrosky (1999, p. 211) estableció la denominación incorrecta 7566:

for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.

5011:

BTW when either of these are done, it won't be necessary to put

4207:

Hello! I just wanted to give a heads up that I am adding to the

3901:

which makes it look as if the reference applies specifically to

1797:, with possibility of it becoming more if not for this debate.-- 1793:

I think that WikiProject Beetles is big enough, ranging at over

1292:

Not helpful to refer to others when they give actual reasons as

383: 9870:

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

9241:

If you're interested in helping, please add yourself using the

9150: 9049:

Interesting and good. That suggests that anything mentioned in

8826: 6627:

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages

4632: 2227:

articles. I feel that splitting or dividing projects, makes it

10314:

32.9% of project tagged articles that have any form of taxobox

10312:

WikiProject Insects is currently using automatic taxoboxes in

9624:

Duckhouse & Lewis (1989 y nueva version 2007) mencionan a

9292:

is valid and coming up blank, need real references. Thank you

9157:

is no assistance; it too links to the DAB page, and I've just

6191:

helping look into the (apparently numerous) issues coming up!

4279:

go here and click the "Do it" button at the bottom to see them

2779: 1876:

suggests 6-12 editors as a minimum for forming a new project.

9367:, but I think it needs a subject expert to determine. Thanks 8647: 8619: 6274: 6235:

Found a mile or so inland on the Sonoma Coast in California.

4640:

start with the area you are active in and take it from there.

2855: 9199:

That doesn't really help. Links to DAB pages are errors per

8587: 7659:, though there is a small possibility that it is a queen of 7298:

Are Bees domesticated? You are invited to join a discussion.

6560:

Knowledge:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

2028: 10240:

Yes, I've noticed this comes up frequently with insects in

8974:

I'd been wondering this myself; these are good guidelines,

8460: 7506:

seems to have taken care of this. Thanks for the heads up!

7140:, but the group is only semi-active at the minute. Cheers. 7027:

As a note there is now a rather contested RFC happening at

6238: 5845: 5578:

Knowledge:WikiProject Plants/Description in year categories

3958:

Thankyou. I agree that we should revert all the additions.

3800:

articles. I opt for immediate reversal of all these edits.

3583: 438:. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets 245: 7915:

hello Broussard and all other "insect"-interested persons.

6953: 6270: 4908:

Anyone know how to make this work with the insect banner?

3682:). They look identical to my untrained eye though. LOL.-- 3588:

Knowledge:WikiProject Insects/ant task force/Popular pages

2207:

Knowledge:WikiProject_Beetles#Possible_descendant_projects

1241:- there is one person who is concerned and that's you and 289:

If someone has a chance to take a look at the question on

8254:

When the names are ambiguous, you are certainly correct.

6488: 6081:

I'm not sure what's gone on, but I was just checking the

5102:

will allow two extra classes, Draft and Redirect; whilst

4731:? As it is now, that category only contains beetles from 4725:

trialing some changes to the WikiProject Insects template

4625: 3274: 343: 8375:(and many are). However, well-known insects such as the 7709: 7563: 7559:

The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.

6438:

I know people use pretty disgusting mixtures to attract

6301:: "There does not seem to be a common English name, but 6023:

In case you haven't found it yet, it's now available on

5382:- only includes articles on WP, but not even all of them 3523: 2236:

perhaps a Hymenoptera task force would be most prudent.

2132:. This drama is not going to help the community at all. 7581: 7575: 3757:

A butterfly feeding on the tears of a turtle in Ecuador

3734:

A butterfly feeding on the tears of a turtle in Ecuador

1498:

since both templates have connection toward that portal

969:

members or active participants of the subproject(s). --

127:

Knowledge:WikiProject Arthropods/Article Classification

10083: 9053:

must be of at least mid importance and probably high.

6940:

general discussion page for the WikiJournal User group

6085:, and there are fewer than I remember. A while ago, I 4149:

Good call, thanks to ThineAntiquePen for reverting.--

3027:

Eidt, Douglas C.; Riegert, Paul W.; Becker, Edward C.

2749:

What would it take to to get this to FL level? It was

10157:

to replace Insecta with Archaeognatha as the parent (

10022:

indeed the photo is clearly identified in Commons as

9248:

If you think a "Wikipedian at Large" is a good idea,

7550:

WikiProject Insects/ant task force|the ant task force

6954:

Shafee, T; Das, D; Masukume, G; Häggström, M (2017).

6896:

See submissions through external academic peer review

5963:

has access to the pub can help out on especially the

5874: 4864:

I tried to restart the conversation a few weeks ago (

9413:

Category:Taxa named by Francis Walker (entomologist)

8576:

Insects of New Zealand edit-a-thon, 3 September 2017

5992:

Does anyone have access to the type description for

5772:, even though it doesn't do anything at the moment). 5323:). The issue has apparently been brought up before ( 4925:

Category:Draft-Class San Antonio task force articles

4528:

with some of the veteran insect folks, I'm making a

1764:

I'm addressing the former. Personally, I think that

9267:

If you can take the time to do this, many thanks. —

6542:

Notice to participants at this page about adminship

5938:This makes life much easier, thanks for notifying! 3030:

Biography of Entomologists in Canadian Publications

8906:that where I'm going next. Hope to see you there. 6054:a small project with open license text from UNESCO 3824:and decide what to do about it. With many thanks, 1069:of disruption, and only meant that it might occur 9434:RfC on categorizing by year of formal description 8823:re-adjusted the target to the heady-heights of 10 8433:the same? Both have the same binomial authority, 6731:, one of 6k insect photographs waiting to be used 2995:. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press. 2506:I personally don't know from where you got those 2282:since I don't know when the debate will end. :(-- 8494:". Thanks for looking after the orphaned stubs! 8108:Searching for the "pea leafminer" I came across 7714: 6641:Greetings WikiProject Insects/Archive 3 Members! 1278:therefore a daughter project should be enough.-- 9009:WikiProject Animals/Assessment#Importance scale 6664:Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report 5259:Category:Redirect-Class Ant task force articles 5225:Help! It's not working with ants articles, see 4501:There is currently a discussion at the antenna 3788:Replicative editing of Leaf-cutter bee articles 2883:Signing with date so this thread will archive. 2812:Copyright Violation Detection - EranBot Project 2477:A WikiProject is a means of organising editors. 10074:Lagria hirta main image might be Lagria atipes 10058:though, the latter having a more redish tail. 9636:Macquart, 1838 como grafía original rechazada. 7924:just because I dont just want to mix them up. 5641:Category:Animals by year of formal description 5560:Category:Species by year of formal description 5520:Category:Insects described in the 20th century 5486:Please provide your feedback at the Tfd page: 4809:Category:Knowledge requested images of insecta 4791:Category:Knowledge requested images of insecta 4737:Category:Knowledge requested images of insecta 2946:"Bibliography of Biographies of Entomologists" 2925:Annals of the Entomological Society of America 2714:We have been working on improving the article 2508:A WikiProject is a means of organising editors 2429:Do not disrupt Knowledge to illustrate a point 9726:The Siphonini (Diptera: Tachinidae) of Europe 5695:{{R from alternative scientific name|insect}} 5099:|topic=Insects |draft=yes |redirect=yes }} 3795:has made a replicate expansion of almost all 3297:Pinging some editors off the top of my head. 3026: 811:it'd likely only be two tags at most for most 9185:has an illustration with the clavus marked. 9153:, which contains no relevant-looking entry. 8646:redirect to said article and list it on the 8077:Derobrachus geminatus vs Derobrachus hovorei 7982:Which is the real "Florida leaf-footed bug"? 7919:I mostly create or edit articles concerning 7760:, or simply whether to replace instances of 6852: 6745:c:Category:New photographs by Judy Gallagher 5558:. We should document this somewhere like on 4957:parameter, so the 'standard' quality scale ( 4845:is a disaster area (undergoing surgery) and 4617: 4243:Just a heads up that from this conversation 3221:, could offer some guidance or suggestions. 3013:. London: British Museum (Natural History). 10026:. I've replaced it with one categorized as 9407:Taxa named by Francis Walker (entomologist) 8954:Knowledge:WikiProject Insects/Popular pages 7831:Yes, I think automatic taxoboxes should be 7715:_Speciesbox?-2017-05-07T07:12:00.000Z": --> 7710:_Speciesbox?-2017-05-07T07:12:00.000Z": --> 7542:Knowledge:WikiProject Insects/Popular pages 6446:" on Nat. Geog., make of it what you will. 5319:species lists are woefully incomplete (eg. 5117:|topic=Insects |FQS=yes |redirect=yes }} 4783:Category:Insects articles needing attention 4729:Category:Insects articles needing attention 3668:. (They also have articles on the species: 2407:essay, concerns maintenance templates like 250:Knowledge:WikiProject Insects/Popular pages 10034:in the UK is that the 'tail' is more red. 9856:WikiProject collaboration notice from the 8580: 6772:regarding proposed merges of the articles 6442:, but blood? Hmm. There is a report of a " 5532:be categorized? It was first described as 4904:Categorizing insects drafts via the banner 3751:) drinking the tears of turtles in Ecuador 3436:Dear insect experts: This draft article: 3036:. Ottawa: Entomological Society of Canada. 2453:means we may not always get what we want. 535:Sharks aren't tagged for the Fish project. 202:article, and would be more appropriate in 10088:http://aramel.free.fr/INSECTES11-21.shtml 9558:As stated by Duckhouse and Lewis (1980), 8467:was described by Panzer in 1810, but the 6971: 5235:Category:NA-Class Ant task force articles 5208:as I run across them (where appropriate) 2970: 2943: 2899:Resources for entomologist bibliographies 8902:is regularly placed near the top of the 8475:was described in 1812 (also by Panzer). 8126:referring to a different species again, 7614: 6723: 6630: 5231:Category:Redirect-Class Insects articles 5183:- but conversely, if somebody has added 3737: 3384: 3278: 3142: 3078: 2435:, but in the case of tagging WP Beetles 2200:size of the relevant editing community, 598:85,000 articles on butterflies and moths 313: 9994:is not correct. It is rather showing a 9887:The discussion about this can be found 9752:Townsend, 1933" (note the year dif) to 9542:Looks like people have argued for both. 9235:Project:New Zealand Wikipedian at Large 8783:Hi, so I was wondering which category, 7131:Could I please submit the updated page 6988:"Wikiversity Journal: A new user group" 5996:that they could pass to me? Thanks!!-- 5973:) please? Thanks in advance, good day, 5123:Template:Class mask#Optional parameters 4915:Looks like someone got it to work with 4787:Category:Ant articles needing attention 3008: 2029:An example will be WikiProject Medicine 1874:Knowledge:WikiProject Council/Proposals 1073:. Apologies if that wasn't apparent. -- 14: 8062:. Editors are invited to contribute. 7562:The report will include a link to the 5770:{{R from alternative scientific name}} 3048:Any help on ID is highly appreciated. 2990: 2722:that the article should be renamed to 1043:, have to say about the whole thing.-- 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 10084:https://en.wikipedia.org/Lagria_hirta 9417:Category:Taxa named by Francis Walker 6334:but it was rather someone's personal 6077:Missing tags for Hymenoptera articles 5870:Tools for exporting AntCat references 3645:, and quickly if you can. Thank you. 2651:, Mishae has been blocked, this time 2309:Category:WikiProject Insects articles 2305:Category:WikiProject Beetles articles 386:and sometimes checks ids on commons) 318:Longhorn beetle, France, Loire Valley 8588:Insects of New Zealand playing cards 6273:in their "ID Request" section or on 5635:. It would make sense to categorize 4927:). Pinging a known template wizard: 4587:the Ant Task Force want to comment? 3759:for Featured Picture consideration. 3666:Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle 2922: 382:is a cerambycid specialist who runs 374:Seems to be correctly identified as 25: 8956:) probably deserve Mid importance. 6417:Are there blood eating butterflies? 4882:I see. Let's go ahead and merge to 4188:the page, for anyone reading this. 3147:Insects mating... help to identify. 3125:Help with taxonomy (insects mating) 2331:, and sub-sorted by, for instance, 1597:(warning, link is slow to load) in 23: 8789:Category:Insects described in 2014 8785:Category:Insects described in 1950 7342: 6720:Tons of new images to sort and use 5816:R from alternative scientific name 5082:Template:WikiProject Insects/class 4991:Template:WikiProject Insects/class 4833:I've made and started to populate 4618:/Archive_3#Hymenoptera_task_forces 2790:discussion has been initiated for 2778: 2275:Knowledge:WikiProject Oligochaetes 2273:Well for one, you are right about 2216:Knowledge:WikiProject Oligochaetes 1904:Summarizing the general consensus 338:please try to check at insecte.org 24: 18:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Insects 10336: 10116:Problem with automatic taxoboxes? 9661:Edited 15:17, 26 April 2018 (UTC) 9125:appreciated if possible. Cheers. 8735:*Sigh*, another reclassification 8371:be at the scientific name as per 7587:meta:User talk:Community Tech bot 7530:– are happy to announce that the 6705:(1947) - and Ralph died in 1941. 5890:/humblebrag notice: I made this. 4131:that the articles were edited as 2364:Have you read what I said above? 663:O' yeah, how about you will read 342:Hello, you might try to check at 293:, it would be much appreciated!-- 10185:, I believe the bot encountered 9927:So far, 84 editors have joined. 9383: 9363:looks to me like a duplicate of 9283:Giant South American grasshopper 7494: 6549:Knowledge:Requests for adminship 5261:which is populating e'en now. -- 5106:/templatepage</noinclude: --> 5088:/templatepage</noinclude: --> 4997:/templatepage</noinclude: --> 4841:covers only a part of the area; 4445: 3522: 3043:File:Megistocera of Kadavoor.jpg 2333:Category:Ant task force articles 1300:on your behavior wrap up first. 29: 9643:10.4067/S0718-686X2014000200007 9609:Wagner & Stuckenberg 2012: 8051:Discussion of article title at 7863:Thanks for the discussion link 7677:is the more likely of the two. 6083:Hymenoptera task force articles 5664:The usage and primary topic of 5314:Numerous genus-level templates? 2944:Carpenter, Mathilde M. (1945). 9867:Portals are being redesigned. 9760:using the same reference. Has 9233:The grant has just gone live: 9072:merits the same importance as 8910:Thanks, happy thoughts et al. 8771:15:09, 22 September 2017 (UTC) 8749:02:28, 19 September 2017 (UTC) 8731:01:05, 19 September 2017 (UTC) 8711:01:35, 18 September 2017 (UTC) 8590:. It'll be 10:00 am – 4:00 pm 7877:want to make it a requirement. 7302:Please join our discussion at 6980: 6947: 6655:2016 Community Wishlist Survey 6469:19:19, 29 September 2016 (UTC) 6456:19:08, 29 September 2016 (UTC) 6431:19:00, 29 September 2016 (UTC) 6411:18:18, 14 September 2016 (UTC) 6391:17:41, 14 September 2016 (UTC) 6377:15:27, 14 September 2016 (UTC) 6348:14:43, 12 September 2016 (UTC) 6328:14:09, 12 September 2016 (UTC) 6231:Trying to identify this insect 5105:{{class mask<noinclude: --> 5087:{{class mask<noinclude: --> 5008:|topic=Insects |draft=yes }} 4996:{{class mask<noinclude: --> 4520:Hymenoptera task force tagging 4324:17:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC) 4305:16:40, 30 September 2015 (UTC) 4291:16:37, 30 September 2015 (UTC) 4273:15:25, 30 September 2015 (UTC) 4257:03:34, 17 September 2015 (UTC) 3726:09:06, 25 September 2015 (UTC) 3711:08:35, 25 September 2015 (UTC) 3655:09:09, 23 September 2015 (UTC) 3631:19:40, 16 September 2015 (UTC) 3613:23:39, 10 September 2015 (UTC) 3573:16:40, 15 September 2015 (UTC) 3537:12:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC) 3501:11:11, 30 September 2015 (UTC) 3484:19:40, 29 September 2015 (UTC) 3469:19:23, 29 September 2015 (UTC) 3450:18:43, 29 September 2015 (UTC) 3179:Knowledge:WikiProject Vespidae 2212:Knowledge:WikiProject Vespidae 602:40,000 Insect related articles 13: 1: 9102:08:04, 15 December 2017 (UTC) 9092:It seems we violently agree. 9086:22:57, 14 December 2017 (UTC) 9070:List of insect-inspired songs 9063:21:52, 14 December 2017 (UTC) 9033:21:09, 14 December 2017 (UTC) 8988:03:42, 14 December 2017 (UTC) 8966:22:25, 13 December 2017 (UTC) 8940:19:53, 13 December 2017 (UTC) 8791:, should be at the bottom of 7748:this proposed move discussion 7321:Which species of bee is this? 7304:Talk:Beekeeping#Domestication 7286:12:27, 25 February 2017 (UTC) 7253:19:57, 17 February 2017 (UTC) 7222:10:40, 17 February 2017 (UTC) 6757:14:50, 20 December 2016 (UTC) 6715:00:59, 19 December 2016 (UTC) 6621:18:08, 25 November 2016 (UTC) 6606:10:50, 24 November 2016 (UTC) 6581:17:46, 22 November 2016 (UTC) 6569:Many thanks and best wishes, 6305:(translating the German name 5749:Knowledge:WikiProject Turtles 5576:For plants, it is suggested ( 5549:Solenopsis saevissima wagneri 5227:Talk:Paraneuretus dubovikoffi 5187:, those should be removed. -- 4733:Knowledge:WikiProject_Beetles 4197:12:09, 12 December 2015 (UTC) 4175:02:02, 10 December 2015 (UTC) 4156:06:29, 29 November 2015 (UTC) 4145:20:53, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 4112:00:23, 29 November 2015 (UTC) 4098:21:15, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 4084:21:12, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 4069:21:09, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 4054:20:59, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 4036:20:42, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 4022:20:41, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 4007:20:05, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 3987:19:51, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 3968:19:27, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 3946:18:31, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 3915:19:27, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 3834:18:09, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 3810:15:51, 28 November 2015 (UTC) 3716:not be visible in the image. 3427:01:18, 3 September 2015 (UTC) 3279:Boudinot, Brendon E. (2015). 2726:. If you look at the article 1494:It still can be accessed via 786:other's banners. That's all. 384:http://www.cerambycoidea.com/ 230:16:27, 11 February 2015 (UTC) 163:21:00, 10 February 2015 (UTC) 10155:Template:Taxonomy/Machilidae 10082:) of the Lagria hirta page ( 9988:The photo in the article on 9556:Quate & Alexander 2000: 9508:Justin Pierre Marie Macquart 9345:07:05, 5 February 2018 (UTC) 9325:22:06, 31 January 2018 (UTC) 9302:21:47, 31 January 2018 (UTC) 9277:06:40, 5 February 2018 (UTC) 9213:10:56, 29 January 2018 (UTC) 9195:14:22, 28 January 2018 (UTC) 9177:13:44, 28 January 2018 (UTC) 8920:21:12, 12 October 2017 (UTC) 8650:disambiguation page. Thanks 8032:which should help a little. 7653:This is probably a queen of 7200:08:49, 26 January 2017 (UTC) 7175:22:56, 25 January 2017 (UTC) 7150:12:31, 25 January 2017 (UTC) 7116:08:18, 26 January 2017 (UTC) 7099:00:17, 24 January 2017 (UTC) 7048:06:34, 26 January 2017 (UTC) 7015:10:38, 24 January 2017 (UTC) 6834:18:58, 20 January 2017 (UTC) 6794:03:40, 18 January 2017 (UTC) 6686:18:01, 7 December 2016 (UTC) 6536:21:42, 26 October 2016 (UTC) 6509:19:49, 26 October 2016 (UTC) 4684:01:10, 3 February 2016 (UTC) 4667:11:57, 1 February 2016 (UTC) 4653:11:46, 1 February 2016 (UTC) 4637:Knowledge:WikiProject Apidae 4612:03:37, 27 January 2016 (UTC) 4597:02:17, 27 January 2016 (UTC) 4582:02:02, 26 January 2016 (UTC) 4566:01:49, 26 January 2016 (UTC) 4436:Trouble finding references? 4384:05:22, 21 October 2015 (UTC) 4353:01:30, 21 October 2015 (UTC) 4338:00:50, 21 October 2015 (UTC) 4232:00:34, 2 December 2015 (UTC) 3783:02:34, 14 October 2015 (UTC) 3521:. Happy to see it end well. 3285:European Journal of Taxonomy 3183:Knowledge:WikiProject Apidae 1065:To clarify, I didn't accuse 436:featured article review here 333:11:39, 1 February 2015 (UTC) 310:Help Identifying this beetle 148:00:14, 9 February 2015 (UTC) 113:23:37, 8 February 2015 (UTC) 7: 9135:08:12, 1 January 2018 (UTC) 9051:Template:Insects in culture 8807:23:34, 2 October 2017 (UTC) 8684:17:18, 29 August 2017 (UTC) 8660:16:25, 29 August 2017 (UTC) 8609:03:46, 19 August 2017 (UTC) 8597:#NZInsectCards project page 7071:discussion on the talk page 6872:that includes the flagship 5969:(named after and linked on 4835:Template:Insects in culture 4829:Template:Insects in culture 4414:04:04, 5 January 2016 (UTC) 4399:00:43, 5 January 2016 (UTC) 4161:HotArticlesBot subscription 3373:16:43, 13 August 2015 (UTC) 3259:16:38, 13 August 2015 (UTC) 2973:American Midland Naturalist 2953:American Midland Naturalist 10: 10341: 9963:I have raised an issue at 9848:01:27, 30 April 2018 (UTC) 9828:21:54, 29 April 2018 (UTC) 9800:14:46, 29 April 2018 (UTC) 9775:14:28, 29 April 2018 (UTC) 9719:12:47, 29 April 2018 (UTC) 9674:15:04, 26 April 2018 (UTC) 9659:14:51, 26 April 2018 (UTC) 9622:Elgueta & Jezek 2014: 9573:10.1603/0013-8746(2000)093 9536:14:31, 26 April 2018 (UTC) 9520:12:05, 26 April 2018 (UTC) 9452:10:54, 26 April 2018 (UTC) 9429:19:12, 11 April 2018 (UTC) 9401:21:53, 20 March 2018 (UTC) 8690:Arthropoda or Euarthropoda 8564:23:07, 1 August 2017 (UTC) 8477:Carabus linnei folgariacus 8315:Naming conventions (fauna) 8104:Scientific v. common names 7962:genus = '''''Colletes''''' 7488:10:41, 29 April 2017 (UTC) 7401:02:16, 26 March 2017 (UTC) 7386:22:23, 25 March 2017 (UTC) 7365:22:10, 25 March 2017 (UTC) 7316:15:17, 21 March 2017 (UTC) 7030:Talk:Neopalpa donaldtrumpi 6766:Please see the discussion 5652:13:07, 21 April 2016 (UTC) 5625:16:35, 20 April 2016 (UTC) 5610:07:13, 20 April 2016 (UTC) 5596:15:47, 19 April 2016 (UTC) 5571:09:48, 19 April 2016 (UTC) 5510:10:21, 17 April 2016 (UTC) 5481:13:21, 16 April 2016 (UTC) 5460:13:21, 16 April 2016 (UTC) 5445:16:47, 15 April 2016 (UTC) 5415:16:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC) 5396:06:50, 15 April 2016 (UTC) 5306:14:24, 15 April 2016 (UTC) 5293:13:02, 15 April 2016 (UTC) 5274:09:56, 15 April 2016 (UTC) 5246:06:51, 15 April 2016 (UTC) 5229:, which is categorized in 5047:23:40, 31 March 2016 (UTC) 5032:23:25, 31 March 2016 (UTC) 4940:23:05, 31 March 2016 (UTC) 4821:23:40, 31 March 2016 (UTC) 4802:22:30, 31 March 2016 (UTC) 4770:14:12, 11 March 2016 (UTC) 4546:22:30, 31 March 2016 (UTC) 4515:09:20, 28 March 2016 (UTC) 4489:21:23, 25 March 2016 (UTC) 3762:Discussion is ongoing, at 3432:A draft article about bees 3358:00:02, 4 August 2015 (UTC) 3344:07:40, 3 August 2015 (UTC) 3329:07:07, 3 August 2015 (UTC) 3246:13:12, 2 August 2015 (UTC) 3231:04:27, 2 August 2015 (UTC) 3199:03:58, 2 August 2015 (UTC) 3161:14:51, 9 August 2015 (UTC) 3139:21:14, 1 August 2015 (UTC) 3120:05:27, 9 August 2015 (UTC) 2679:23:36, 30 April 2015 (UTC) 2665:20:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC) 2643:19:34, 30 April 2015 (UTC) 2621:23:30, 29 April 2015 (UTC) 2562:23:39, 29 April 2015 (UTC) 1329:is to me looks a lot like 1288:18:28, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 1225:15:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 1201:13:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 1179:13:09, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 1145:09:53, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 1123:09:54, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 1105:09:19, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 1053:08:57, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 979:07:05, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 919:05:11, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 898:03:44, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 883:03:19, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 853:03:02, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 831:02:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 796:02:38, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 758:02:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 736:02:24, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 681:02:28, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 648:02:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 629:02:14, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 614:01:47, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 576:01:43, 31 March 2015 (UTC) 557:21:04, 29 March 2015 (UTC) 523:15:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC) 500:22:02, 30 April 2015 (UTC) 484:05:16, 20 April 2015 (UTC) 461:18:28, 30 April 2015 (UTC) 396:15:37, 29 March 2015 (UTC) 365:15:24, 29 March 2015 (UTC) 305:15:36, 18 March 2015 (UTC) 275:04:38, 14 March 2015 (UTC) 10326:01:24, 16 July 2018 (UTC) 10295:02:07, 14 July 2018 (UTC) 10280:00:57, 14 July 2018 (UTC) 10253:17:37, 13 July 2018 (UTC) 10228:06:27, 13 July 2018 (UTC) 10200:14:32, 13 July 2018 (UTC) 10171:03:16, 13 July 2018 (UTC) 10137:23:08, 12 July 2018 (UTC) 10068:11:40, 25 June 2018 (UTC) 10044:10:47, 25 June 2018 (UTC) 10010:09:03, 25 June 2018 (UTC) 9977:11:44, 23 June 2018 (UTC) 9814:. Thanks for flagging me 9576:Hribar & DeMay 2011: 9377:19:26, 4 March 2018 (UTC) 8925:Importance grading scheme 8543:03:41, 27 July 2017 (UTC) 8525:02:40, 27 July 2017 (UTC) 8504:05:14, 25 July 2017 (UTC) 8447:03:51, 22 July 2017 (UTC) 8394:04:04, 25 July 2017 (UTC) 8353:19:59, 22 July 2017 (UTC) 8333:13:43, 13 July 2017 (UTC) 8309:05:52, 12 July 2017 (UTC) 8294:00:21, 12 July 2017 (UTC) 8264:09:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC) 8250:04:04, 25 July 2017 (UTC) 8224:09:30, 12 July 2017 (UTC) 8195:19:27, 10 July 2017 (UTC) 8181:19:22, 10 July 2017 (UTC) 8161:18:42, 10 July 2017 (UTC) 8143:18:10, 10 July 2017 (UTC) 8072:07:02, 20 June 2017 (UTC) 8060:Talk:Grasshopper#Taxonomy 6293:Common name for Sapygidae 6215:14:03, 29 June 2016 (UTC) 6201:01:46, 29 June 2016 (UTC) 6164:04:16, 22 June 2016 (UTC) 6145:02:21, 22 June 2016 (UTC) 6130:02:09, 22 June 2016 (UTC) 6115:23:08, 18 June 2016 (UTC) 6099:22:17, 18 June 2016 (UTC) 6072:14:40, 28 June 2016 (UTC) 6036:19:00, 18 June 2016 (UTC) 5911:that can generate these. 5903:(based on cite web), see 5670:is under discussion, see 5341:12:09, 8 April 2016 (UTC) 5218:00:39, 2 April 2016 (UTC) 5200:23:49, 1 April 2016 (UTC) 5151:10:37, 1 April 2016 (UTC) 5138:08:36, 1 April 2016 (UTC) 5076:06:11, 1 April 2016 (UTC) 5061:01:53, 1 April 2016 (UTC) 5037:2,000 NA-class articles! 4919:WikiProject United States 4896:07:14, 2 April 2016 (UTC) 4878:00:53, 2 April 2016 (UTC) 4859:16:32, 1 April 2016 (UTC) 4749:23:11, 9 March 2016 (UTC) 3745:– Two Julia Butterflies ( 3438:User:Apismell2015/sandbox 3075:12:01, 17 July 2015 (UTC) 3060:..., please have a look. 2917:03:56, 13 July 2015 (UTC) 2775:listed at Requested moves 2600:22:00, 4 April 2015 (UTC) 2585:19:45, 4 April 2015 (UTC) 2540:06:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC) 2525:22:34, 3 April 2015 (UTC) 2495:07:48, 3 April 2015 (UTC) 2463:00:07, 4 April 2015 (UTC) 2383:22:34, 3 April 2015 (UTC) 2353:21:59, 3 April 2015 (UTC) 2339:simply modify the url to 2292:03:08, 3 April 2015 (UTC) 2261:00:28, 3 April 2015 (UTC) 2246:00:28, 3 April 2015 (UTC) 2172:20:44, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 2142:20:36, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 2124:20:21, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 2095:23:36, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 2081:22:57, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 2056:20:08, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 2041:19:31, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 2007:07:47, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1991:04:40, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1963:13:44, 5 April 2015 (UTC) 1942:20:20, 4 April 2015 (UTC) 1923:19:24, 4 April 2015 (UTC) 1886:16:04, 3 April 2015 (UTC) 1869:03:41, 3 April 2015 (UTC) 1845:02:49, 3 April 2015 (UTC) 1828:12:44, 3 April 2015 (UTC) 1807:00:10, 3 April 2015 (UTC) 1782:22:53, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1753:20:18, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1732:20:13, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1710:20:01, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1644:20:18, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1630:19:53, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1615:19:42, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1572:20:26, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1557:20:06, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1479:10:23, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1464:04:37, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1423:01:05, 2 April 2015 (UTC) 1310:13:01, 1 April 2015 (UTC) 440:featured article criteria 412:19:05, 4 April 2015 (UTC) 402:Many thanks to you both! 10268:Clistopyga crassicaudata 10263:Clistopyga crassicaudata 10110:13:29, 1 July 2018 (UTC) 9954:07:42, 30 May 2018 (UTC) 9203:, and need to be fixed. 8459:The website you want is 8098:08:42, 9 July 2017 (UTC) 8045:23:27, 8 June 2017 (UTC) 8014:22:58, 8 June 2017 (UTC) 7974:02:08, 30 May 2017 (UTC) 7938:13:50, 29 May 2017 (UTC) 7908:23:58, 17 May 2017 (UTC) 7887:20:33, 10 May 2017 (UTC) 7701:03:00, 24 May 2017 (UTC) 7687:01:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC) 7641:22:07, 23 May 2017 (UTC) 7606:11:44, 18 May 2017 (UTC) 7053:Donald Trump and insects 6899:Format accepted articles 6729:Neolochmaea dilatipennis 6287:22:27, 6 July 2016 (UTC) 6253:16:31, 5 July 2016 (UTC) 6239:http://imgur.com/a/VFK9P 6011:15:22, 2 June 2016 (UTC) 5983:12:56, 12 May 2016 (UTC) 5526:For example, how should 5103: 5085: 4994: 4494:Discussion about moving 4440:is proud to announce ... 4088:That's fine. Thank you. 3584:http://stats.grok.se/en/ 3277:and subfamily articles: 3009:Gilbert, Pamela (1977). 2893:03:54, 3 July 2015 (UTC) 2843:16:20, 2 July 2015 (UTC) 2820:. This bot utilizes the 2807:23:18, 28 May 2015 (UTC) 2767:08:05, 26 May 2015 (UTC) 2740:09:49, 19 May 2015 (UTC) 1906:just for beetle articles 726:have something to add?-- 348:www.galerie-insecte.org/ 246:http://stats.grok.se/en/ 208:. My impression is that 9939:WikiProject's talk page 9910:On April 8th, 2018, an 9879:Transclude lead excerpt 9506:. It seems agreed that 9361:Harpalus pennsylvanicus 9354:Harpalus pennsylvanicus 8026:Acanthocephala femorata 8022:Florida leaf-footed bug 7996:Florida leaf-footed bug 7992:Acanthocephala femorata 7859:02:38, 8 May 2017 (UTC) 7845:01:22, 8 May 2017 (UTC) 7823:02:12, 8 May 2017 (UTC) 7809:01:22, 8 May 2017 (UTC) 7790:09:02, 7 May 2017 (UTC) 7735:07:12, 7 May 2017 (UTC) 7594:The Community Tech Team 7516:23:59, 1 May 2017 (UTC) 6960:WikiJournal of Medicine 6875:WikiJournal of Medicine 6497:described a bug in 2001 6365:Thanks for your answer. 5948:07:10, 6 May 2016 (UTC) 5933:02:58, 5 May 2016 (UTC) 5862:12:53, 5 May 2016 (UTC) 5832:20:54, 4 May 2016 (UTC) 5800:20:54, 4 May 2016 (UTC) 5724:09:48, 4 May 2016 (UTC) 5684:06:50, 4 May 2016 (UTC) 5365:Navbox Strongylognathus 4983:|QUALITY_SCALE=extended 4184:! Really cool feature. 4133:part of an edit contest 3677:Dociostaurus maroccanus 3404:as author claimed or a 3166:Hymenoptera task forces 2991:Mallis, Arnold (1971). 2745:List of ant subfamilies 2694:05:15, 1 May 2015 (UTC) 838:is very clear on this, 472:request for a copyedit. 131:Template:Grading scheme 9526:original description. 9365:Harpalus pensylvanicus 9149:links to the DAB page 8819:Colorado potato beetle 8794:Tetramorium inquilinum 8366:and the related genus 8117:Liriomyza huidobrensis 8111:Chromatomyia horticola 8030:Leptoglossus phyllopus 7988:Leptoglossus phyllopus 7628: 7347: 6870:WikiJournal User Group 6865:WikiJournal of Science 6857: 6841:WikiJournal of Science 6732: 6635: 6493:Nathaniel Lord Britton 6172:Category:Wasp taxonomy 5689:Tagging redirect pages 5637:Temnothorax inquilinus 5529:Temnothorax inquilinus 5321:Template:Navbox_Bombus 4987:|QUALITY_SCALE=subpage 4456:Alexander Street Press 4450:The Knowledge Library 3793:User:Thine Antique Pen 3752: 3397: 3148: 3090: 2993:American Entomologists 2830:EranBot reporting page 2824:(ithenticate), unlike 2818:EranBot reporting page 2796:Goniglossum wiedemanni 2783: 1385:Ser Amantio di Nicolao 706:Ser Amantio di Nicolao 319: 194:genus page). However, 10187:Archaeognatha in ITIS 10182:Petridiobius arcticus 10144:Petridiobius arcticus 10127:Petridiobius arcticus 10123:Category:Insect stubs 9965:Talk:Stigmus#Stigmina 9618:10.5733/afin.053.0119 9497:Nemapalpus nearcticus 9491:Nemopalpus nearcticus 9290:Tropidacris violaceus 8833:Particular thanks to 8123:Serpentine leaf miner 7673:). Given the locale, 7627: 7346: 7063:Neopalpa donaldtrumpi 7021:Neopalpa donaldtrumpi 6973:10.15347/wjm/2017.001 6856: 6811:Neopalpa donaldtrumpi 6778:Aurelian (entomology) 6727: 6634: 6180:and all subcategories 6178:Category:Bee taxonomy 6174:and all subcategories 5672:DRAFT TALK:Usurpation 5583:Hyacinthoides italica 5538:Red imported fire ant 5534:Chalepoxenus tauricus 5251:Yep, we forgot to do 4438:The Knowledge Library 3741: 3637:The wrong grasshopper 3388: 3269:New monograph on ants 3146: 3082: 2937:10.1093/aesa/21.3.489 2782: 935:Knowledge:WikiProject 317: 291:Talk:Cimex antennatus 91:Hi! I tagged a page, 42:of past discussions. 9959:A link to a DAB page 9694:Nothing, absolutely 9332:Tropidacris collaris 9294:Ruff tuff cream puff 9269:Giantflightlessbirds 9140:A link to a DAB page 9120:Cerambycidae cleanup 8995:Giantflightlessbirds 8980:Giantflightlessbirds 8601:Giantflightlessbirds 7522:Popular pages report 7124:Reassessment request 6297:From the article on 5237:. Anyone knows why? 4635:is too exclusive -- 4371:Category:Lepidoptera 3549:Erysichton elaborata 3457:looks like a copyvio 3293:10.5852/ejt.2015.120 2849:Asian predatory wasp 2130:talk page guidelines 1210:hand here following 376:Aegosoma scabricorne 354:User:Tonton Bernardo 9858:Portals WikiProject 9582:Macquart 1838 (not 8128:Liriomyza brassicae 7746:Is this related to 7662:Bombus griseocollis 7138:WikiProject Beetles 6936:journal's talk page 6902:Promote the journal 6702:Cortodera coniferae 6243:Thanks in advance! 6087:filed a bot request 5905:Template:AntCat/doc 5353:Navbox Chalepoxenus 4949:WikiProject Insects 4843:Cultural entomology 4839:Economic entomology 4624:taxa interested in 4534:{{Hymenoptera=yes}} 4466:There are up to 30 4209:Anopheles albimanus 4203:Anopheles albimanus 3849:is an example page. 3641:Please hop over to 2826:User:CorenSearchBot 2792:Carpomya wiedemanni 2773:Carpomya wiedemanni 2368:. I also said that 1795:10,000 articles now 1496:Portal talk:Insects 1269:WikiProject Insects 1259:WikiProject Beetles 10216:sensu strictissimo 10212:Insect#Definitions 9932:newsletter archive 9680:The mystery genus 9603: 9550: 9510:is the authority. 8904:monthly view table 7944:_Speciesbox?": --> 7941:_Speciesbox?": --> 7937:_Speciesbox?": --> 7913:_Speciesbox?": --> 7741:_Speciesbox?": --> 7738:_Speciesbox?": --> 7734:_Speciesbox?": --> 7721:_Speciesbox?": --> 7691:Thanks very much! 7629: 7573:We're grateful to 7537:Community Tech bot 7348: 6858: 6733: 6636: 6593:Colilodion schulzi 6184:Category:Vespoidea 5542:Solenopsis invicta 4363:Category:Hemiptera 3753: 3398: 3149: 3091: 2784: 2326:large category TOC 2192:determined by the 320: 10112: 10096:comment added by 10028:Bombus ruderarius 9991:Bombus ruderarius 9983:Bombus ruderarius 9949:The Transhumanist 9601: 9548: 9155:Insect morphology 9013:Western honey bee 8682: 8493: 8100: 8088:comment added by 8016: 8004:comment added by 7775:automatic taxobox 7755:Automatic taxobox 7625: 7579:for his original 7532:Popular pages bot 7011: 7004: 7003: 6688: 6303:club-horned wasps 6267:cerambicid beetle 5914:Ping ant people: 5880:example reference 5807: 5806: 5699:WP Plants does it 5697:, similar to how 5553: 5546: 5513: 5496:comment added by 5325:insect discussion 5257:. I also created 4496:Antenna (biology) 4235: 4218:comment added by 4104:Thine Antique Pen 4090:Thine Antique Pen 4046:Thine Antique Pen 3999:Thine Antique Pen 3881:Megachile xxxxxxx 3709: 3694: 3670:Aiolopus strepens 3571: 3217:, who set up the 2879: 2865:comment added by 2822:Turnitin software 2403:, and the entire 2397:Knowledge:CatScan 430:I have nominated 280:Primary host for 103:) when replying. 82: 81: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 10332: 10091: 10078:The main image ( 10024:Bombus ruderatus 10021: 9997:Bombus ruderatus 9952: 9883: 9877: 9825: 9820: 9391: 9387: 9386: 9314: 9166: 9160: 9021:Māori task force 9006: 8998: 8951: 8709: 8708: 8672: 8671: 8584: 8553: 8514: 8491: 8473:C. linnei linnei 8458: 8347: 8342: 8288: 8283: 8083: 8043: 8042: 7999: 7963: 7959: 7958:taxon = Colletes 7945: 7942: 7914: 7779: 7773: 7769: 7763: 7759: 7753: 7742: 7739: 7722: 7716: 7711: 7656:Bombus impatiens 7652: 7626: 7584: 7578: 7547: 7544:and the subpage 7539: 7502: 7498: 7497: 7473: 7455: 7432:Common whitetail 7425:Common whitetail 7418: 7362: 7357: 7354: 7339: 7331: 7275: 7242: 7210: 7188: 7160: 7106:There are some. 7042: 7037: 7009: 6996: 6995: 6984: 6978: 6977: 6975: 6951: 6849: 6848: 6830: 6825: 6820:some attention. 6799:Article exposure 6683: 6656: 6467: 6429: 6264: 6022: 6005: 6000: 5902: 5896: 5820: 5814: 5771: 5767: 5733:Extended content 5729: 5728: 5708: 5696: 5669: 5556:User:Burklemore1 5551: 5544: 5512: 5490: 5381: 5375: 5370:- not up to date 5369: 5363: 5357: 5351: 5329:plant discussion 5287: 5282: 5265: 5256: 5207: 5191: 5186: 5182: 5177: 5171: 5129: 5116: 5113: 5110: 5098: 5095: 5092: 5023: 5017:Draft talk:Asaki 5014: 5007: 5004: 5001: 4988: 4984: 4956: 4953:does not have a 4952: 4922: 4780: 4764: 4759: 4722: 4715: 4708: 4701: 4535: 4487: 4449: 4367:Category:Odonata 4234: 4212: 4153: 3884:... etc etc ..." 3707: 3704: 3698: 3697: 3692: 3689: 3683: 3611: 3568: 3563: 3561: 3526: 3424: 3416: 3402:Pantala hymenaea 3390:Pantala hymenaea 3318: 3311: 3304: 3296: 3212: 3176: 3072: 3064: 3037: 3035: 3023: 3005: 2987: 2967: 2950: 2940: 2878: 2859: 2720:Cricket (insect) 2716:Cricket (insect) 2631: 2610: 2550: 2505: 2426: 2420: 2416: 2410: 2393: 2363: 2330: 2324: 2320: 2314: 2302: 2272: 2161: 2152: 2107: 2066: 2025: 2017: 1952: 1857: 1817: 1792: 1763: 1720: 1698: 1690: 1682: 1674: 1666: 1658: 1599:Category:Beetles 1489: 1412: 1404: 1396: 1388: 1380: 1372: 1364: 1356: 1348: 1340: 1320: 1273: 1267: 1263: 1257: 1248: 1235: 1189: 1167: 1133: 1090: 1042: 1034: 1026: 1018: 1010: 989: 908: 863: 813:, that's right, 807: 725: 717: 709: 701: 693: 669:WP:PROJGUIDE#OWN 662: 635:WP:PROJGUIDE#OWN 594: 586: 506:Tagging projects 453: 303: 283:cimex antennatus 273: 124: 102: 93:Photinus pyralis 86:Photinus pyralis 73: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 10340: 10339: 10335: 10334: 10333: 10331: 10330: 10329: 10303: 10265: 10179:In the case of 10118: 10076: 10015: 9986: 9961: 9945: 9908: 9881: 9875: 9861: 9823: 9816: 9734:Taxonomic Index 9685: 9628:como error for 9466: 9436: 9409: 9384: 9382: 9359:Hi the article 9357: 9308: 9286: 9223: 9164: 9158: 9142: 9122: 9000: 8992: 8945: 8927: 8900:Hercules beetle 8896:Protocoleoptera 8814: 8781: 8700: 8699: 8692: 8667: 8616: 8578: 8556:M. A. Broussard 8547: 8511:M. A. Broussard 8508: 8496:M. A. Broussard 8481:Carabus linnaei 8452: 8430:Carabus linnaei 8419: 8414:Carabus linnaei 8386:M. A. Broussard 8345: 8340: 8286: 8281: 8242:M. A. Broussard 8106: 8079: 8056: 8034: 8033: 7984: 7966:M. A. Broussard 7961: 7957: 7900:M. A. Broussard 7865:M. A. Broussard 7851:M. A. Broussard 7815:M. A. Broussard 7777: 7771: 7767: 7761: 7757: 7751: 7726:M. A. Broussard 7718: 7679:M. A. Broussard 7667:B. griseocollis 7646: 7615: 7613: 7580: 7574: 7545: 7535: 7524: 7508:M. A. Broussard 7495: 7493: 7478:and pasted in. 7446: 7430: 7427: 7412: 7360: 7355: 7352: 7333: 7325: 7323: 7300: 7269: 7236: 7204: 7182: 7154: 7126: 7055: 7040: 7035: 7025: 7005: 7000: 6999: 6986: 6985: 6981: 6952: 6948: 6932: 6931: 6911: 6905: 6893: 6846: 6828: 6823: 6808:is linked from 6801: 6782:Lepidopterology 6764: 6762:Proposed merges 6722: 6697: 6654: 6644: 6629: 6588: 6544: 6485: 6465: 6440:Purple Emperors 6427: 6419: 6295: 6279:M. A. Broussard 6258: 6233: 6193:M. A. Broussard 6122:M. A. Broussard 6091:M. A. Broussard 6079: 6044: 6016: 6003: 5998: 5990: 5966:Euryomma muisca 5960: 5900: 5894: 5872: 5844:redirecting to 5818: 5812: 5808: 5769: 5765: 5734: 5716:M. A. Broussard 5709:expressed some 5702: 5694: 5691: 5665: 5662: 5524: 5498:M. A. Broussard 5491: 5473:M. A. Broussard 5452:M. A. Broussard 5379: 5373: 5367: 5361: 5355: 5349: 5333:M. A. Broussard 5316: 5285: 5280: 5263: 5252: 5210:M. A. Broussard 5205: 5189: 5184: 5180: 5173: 5168:M. A. Broussard 5165: 5127: 5119: 5118: 5114: 5111: 5108: 5101: 5100: 5096: 5093: 5090: 5068:M. A. Broussard 5039:M. A. Broussard 5021: 5012: 5010: 5009: 5005: 5002: 4999: 4986: 4982: 4955:|QUALITY_SCALE= 4954: 4946: 4916: 4906: 4884:Ethnoentomology 4870:M. A. Broussard 4847:Ethnoentomology 4831: 4813:M. A. Broussard 4777:M. A. Broussard 4774: 4762: 4757: 4741:M. A. Broussard 4716: 4709: 4702: 4695: 4676:M. A. Broussard 4589:M. A. Broussard 4558:M. A. Broussard 4553: 4551:Apidae/Apoidea? 4538:M. A. Broussard 4533: 4522: 4507:M. A. Broussard 4499: 4477: 4452: 4442: 4312:see this search 4241: 4213: 4205: 4163: 4151: 3790: 3755:I've nominated 3736: 3705: 3700: 3695: 3690: 3685: 3639: 3599: 3580: 3566: 3559: 3551: 3434: 3422: 3414: 3406:Tramea calverti 3394:Tramea calverti 3383: 3312: 3305: 3298: 3271: 3210: 3170: 3168: 3127: 3102: 3070: 3062: 3046: 3033: 3020: 3002: 2948: 2909:--Animalparty-- 2901: 2860: 2852: 2814: 2794:to be moved to 2777: 2747: 2712: 2671:--Animalparty-- 2625: 2604: 2544: 2499: 2455:--Animalparty-- 2424: 2418: 2414: 2408: 2387: 2357: 2345:--Animalparty-- 2328: 2322: 2318: 2312: 2296: 2266: 2253:--Animalparty-- 2238:--Animalparty-- 2155: 2146: 2101: 2060: 2019: 2011: 1973: 1946: 1934:--Animalparty-- 1851: 1811: 1786: 1757: 1714: 1692: 1684: 1676: 1668: 1660: 1652: 1483: 1406: 1398: 1390: 1382: 1374: 1366: 1358: 1350: 1342: 1334: 1314: 1271: 1265: 1261: 1255: 1242: 1229: 1183: 1161: 1127: 1084: 1036: 1028: 1020: 1012: 1004: 983: 960:under a third ( 902: 857: 801: 719: 711: 703: 695: 687: 656: 600:. We also have 588: 580: 508: 468: 451: 428: 380:User:Vitalfranz 344:www.insecte.org 340: 312: 294: 287: 261: 242: 212:females attack 118: 96: 89: 69: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 10338: 10302: 10299: 10298: 10297: 10272:49.145.244.119 10264: 10261: 10260: 10259: 10258: 10257: 10256: 10255: 10233: 10232: 10231: 10230: 10205: 10204: 10203: 10202: 10174: 10173: 10117: 10114: 10075: 10072: 10071: 10070: 10047: 10046: 9985: 9980: 9960: 9957: 9907: 9904: 9860: 9854: 9853: 9852: 9851: 9850: 9840:Monster Iestyn 9833: 9832: 9831: 9830: 9792:Monster Iestyn 9784: 9783: 9778: 9777: 9711:Monster Iestyn 9684: 9678: 9677: 9676: 9662: 9647: 9646: 9645: 9620: 9596: 9595: 9594: 9574: 9543: 9539: 9538: 9465: 9455: 9435: 9432: 9408: 9405: 9404: 9403: 9356: 9351: 9350: 9349: 9348: 9347: 9285: 9280: 9265: 9264: 9257: 9252:write a short 9246: 9222: 9219: 9218: 9217: 9216: 9215: 9141: 9138: 9121: 9118: 9117: 9116: 9115: 9114: 9113: 9112: 9111: 9110: 9109: 9108: 9107: 9106: 9105: 9104: 9078:--Animalparty! 9040: 9039: 9038: 9037: 9036: 9035: 9025:--Animalparty! 8969: 8968: 8926: 8923: 8909: 8813: 8810: 8780: 8777: 8776: 8775: 8774: 8773: 8752: 8751: 8741:--Animalparty! 8733: 8702:SchreiberBike 8691: 8688: 8687: 8686: 8644:Ravet (insect) 8615: 8612: 8577: 8574: 8573: 8572: 8571: 8570: 8569: 8568: 8567: 8566: 8489:Carabus linnei 8465:Carabus linnei 8424:Carabus linnei 8418: 8417:- same insect? 8408:Carabus linnei 8404: 8403: 8402: 8401: 8400: 8399: 8398: 8397: 8396: 8360:Osmia lignaria 8335: 8276: 8275: 8274: 8273: 8272: 8271: 8270: 8269: 8268: 8267: 8266: 8252: 8216: 8215: 8214: 8213: 8212: 8211: 8210: 8209: 8208: 8207: 8105: 8102: 8090:98.180.128.146 8078: 8075: 8055: 8049: 8048: 8047: 8036:SchreiberBike 7983: 7980: 7979: 7978: 7977: 7976: 7917: 7916: 7910: 7894: 7893: 7892: 7891: 7890: 7889: 7828: 7827: 7826: 7825: 7811: 7793: 7792: 7782:--Animalparty! 7717: 7712:Taxobox -: --> 7707: 7706: 7705: 7704: 7703: 7612: 7609: 7592:Warm regards, 7571: 7570: 7567: 7564:pageviews tool 7560: 7546:/Popular pages 7528:Community Tech 7523: 7520: 7519: 7518: 7475: 7474: 7426: 7423: 7422: 7421: 7420: 7419: 7408:Apis mellifera 7403: 7378:--Animalparty! 7373:Apis mellifera 7322: 7319: 7299: 7296: 7295: 7294: 7293: 7292: 7291: 7290: 7289: 7288: 7260: 7259: 7258: 7257: 7256: 7255: 7229: 7228: 7227: 7226: 7225: 7224: 7125: 7122: 7121: 7120: 7119: 7118: 7083:WP:NOTCENSORED 7054: 7051: 7024: 7018: 7002: 7001: 6998: 6997: 6979: 6945: 6944: 6930: 6929: 6926: 6915: 6910: 6907: 6906: 6904: 6903: 6900: 6897: 6892: 6889: 6888: 6887: 6859: 6847: 6845: 6837: 6800: 6797: 6786:--Animalparty! 6763: 6760: 6737:Judy Gallagher 6721: 6718: 6696: 6692:New article - 6690: 6678:Best regards, 6667: 6666: 6638: 6628: 6625: 6624: 6623: 6587: 6584: 6573:Anna Frodesiak 6564: 6563: 6543: 6540: 6539: 6538: 6484: 6481:Recilia glabra 6477: 6476: 6475: 6474: 6473: 6472: 6471: 6418: 6415: 6414: 6413: 6398: 6397: 6396: 6395: 6394: 6393: 6366: 6360: 6359: 6358: 6357: 6351: 6350: 6307:Keulhornwespen 6294: 6291: 6290: 6289: 6232: 6229: 6228: 6227: 6226: 6225: 6224: 6223: 6222: 6221: 6220: 6219: 6218: 6217: 6188: 6187: 6186: 6181: 6175: 6078: 6075: 6043: 6040: 6039: 6038: 5989: 5986: 5959: 5956:Euryomma (fly) 5952: 5951: 5950: 5871: 5868: 5867: 5866: 5865: 5864: 5805: 5804: 5803: 5802: 5786: 5785: 5780: 5779: 5774: 5773: 5760: 5759: 5754: 5753: 5744: 5743: 5736: 5735: 5732: 5727: 5690: 5687: 5661: 5658: 5657: 5656: 5655: 5654: 5633:User:Plantdrew 5629: 5628: 5627: 5552:Santschi, 1916 5523: 5516: 5515: 5514: 5469: 5468: 5467: 5466: 5465: 5464: 5463: 5462: 5420: 5419: 5418: 5417: 5399: 5398: 5385: 5384: 5383: 5377:Navbox Myrmica 5371: 5359: 5358:- is a synonym 5315: 5312: 5311: 5310: 5309: 5308: 5295: 5223: 5222: 5221: 5220: 5181:|class=project 5163: 5162: 5161: 5160: 5159: 5158: 5157: 5156: 5155: 5154: 5153: 5104: 5086: 4995: 4945:At the moment 4905: 4902: 4901: 4900: 4899: 4898: 4830: 4827: 4826: 4825: 4824: 4823: 4772: 4693: 4692: 4691: 4690: 4689: 4688: 4687: 4686: 4671: 4670: 4669: 4641: 4552: 4549: 4521: 4518: 4498: 4492: 4443: 4441: 4434: 4433: 4432: 4431: 4430: 4429: 4428: 4427: 4426: 4425: 4424: 4423: 4422: 4421: 4420: 4419: 4418: 4417: 4416: 4359:Category:Flies 4240: 4237: 4204: 4201: 4200: 4199: 4162: 4159: 4125: 4124: 4123: 4122: 4121: 4120: 4119: 4118: 4117: 4116: 4115: 4114: 4071: 4024: 3994: 3975: 3974: 3973: 3972: 3971: 3970: 3951: 3950: 3949: 3948: 3931: 3930: 3929: 3928: 3922: 3921: 3920: 3919: 3918: 3917: 3894: 3893: 3892: 3891: 3890: 3889: 3888: 3887: 3886: 3885: 3868: 3867: 3866: 3865: 3864: 3863: 3853: 3852: 3851: 3850: 3837: 3836: 3789: 3786: 3735: 3732: 3731: 3730: 3729: 3728: 3647:Anna Frodesiak 3643:this talk page 3638: 3635: 3634: 3633: 3596:Tool Labs tool 3579: 3578:Pageview stats 3576: 3550: 3547: 3546: 3545: 3544: 3543: 3542: 3541: 3540: 3539: 3529:Anna Frodesiak 3508: 3507: 3506: 3505: 3504: 3503: 3489:Anna Frodesiak 3461:Anna Frodesiak 3433: 3430: 3382: 3377: 3376: 3375: 3362: 3361: 3360: 3321:--Animalparty! 3270: 3267: 3266: 3265: 3264: 3263: 3262: 3261: 3223:--Animalparty! 3219:Ant task force 3167: 3164: 3126: 3123: 3101: 3100:at peer review 3095: 3093: 3045: 3040: 3039: 3038: 3024: 3018: 3006: 3000: 2988: 2979:(2): 257–348. 2968: 2941: 2931:(3): 489–520. 2900: 2897: 2896: 2895: 2867:90.199.240.137 2851: 2846: 2813: 2810: 2788:requested move 2776: 2770: 2746: 2743: 2711: 2708: 2707: 2706: 2705: 2704: 2703: 2702: 2701: 2700: 2699: 2698: 2697: 2696: 2667: 2571: 2570: 2569: 2568: 2567: 2566: 2565: 2564: 2472: 2471: 2470: 2469: 2468: 2467: 2466: 2465: 2401:WP:OVERTAGGING 2370:WP:OVERTAGGING 2189:Ant task force 2185: 2184: 2183: 2182: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2178: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2174: 2099: 2098: 2097: 1972: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1966: 1965: 1944: 1926: 1925: 1901: 1900: 1899: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1889: 1888: 1832: 1831: 1830: 1737: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1649: 1648: 1647: 1646: 1591: 1590: 1589: 1588: 1587: 1586: 1585: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1581: 1580: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1574: 1530: 1529: 1528: 1527: 1526: 1525: 1524: 1523: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1518: 1517: 1516: 1515: 1514: 1513: 1510:Redundant tags 1506:WP:OVERTAGGING 1502: 1499: 1440: 1439: 1438: 1437: 1436: 1435: 1434: 1433: 1432: 1431: 1430: 1429: 1331:WP:IDONTLIKEIT 1276:Insects portal 1204: 1203: 1181: 1158: 1157: 1156: 1155: 1154: 1153: 1152: 1151: 1150: 1149: 1148: 1147: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 953: 949: 948: 947: 944: 941: 930: 929: 928: 927: 926: 925: 924: 923: 922: 921: 783: 782: 781: 780: 779: 778: 777: 776: 775: 774: 773: 772: 771: 770: 769: 768: 767: 766: 765: 764: 763: 762: 761: 760: 560: 559: 543: 542: 537: 536: 531: 530: 507: 504: 503: 502: 467: 464: 427: 424: 423: 422: 421: 420: 419: 418: 417: 416: 415: 414: 339: 336: 311: 308: 286: 278: 258:Tool Labs tool 241: 240:Pageview stats 238: 237: 236: 235: 234: 233: 232: 168: 167: 166: 165: 88: 83: 80: 79: 74: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 10337: 10328: 10327: 10323: 10319: 10315: 10310: 10308: 10296: 10292: 10288: 10284: 10283: 10282: 10281: 10277: 10273: 10269: 10254: 10251: 10247: 10243: 10239: 10238: 10237: 10236: 10235: 10234: 10229: 10225: 10221: 10220:Peter coxhead 10217: 10214:. If Insecta 10213: 10209: 10208: 10207: 10206: 10201: 10197: 10193: 10188: 10184: 10183: 10178: 10177: 10176: 10175: 10172: 10168: 10164: 10160: 10159:see this diff 10156: 10151: 10146: 10145: 10141: 10140: 10139: 10138: 10135: 10130: 10128: 10124: 10113: 10111: 10107: 10103: 10099: 10095: 10089: 10085: 10081: 10069: 10065: 10061: 10057: 10056:B. lapidarius 10053: 10052:B. ruderarius 10049: 10048: 10045: 10041: 10037: 10036:Peter coxhead 10033: 10032:B. ruderarius 10029: 10025: 10019: 10014: 10013: 10012: 10011: 10007: 10003: 9999: 9998: 9993: 9992: 9984: 9979: 9978: 9974: 9970: 9966: 9956: 9955: 9951: 9950: 9942: 9940: 9935: 9933: 9928: 9925: 9922: 9920: 9915: 9913: 9903: 9901: 9900: 9894: 9892: 9891: 9885: 9880: 9871: 9868: 9865: 9859: 9849: 9845: 9841: 9837: 9836: 9835: 9834: 9829: 9826: 9821: 9819: 9813: 9812: 9807: 9803: 9802: 9801: 9797: 9793: 9789: 9786: 9785: 9780: 9779: 9776: 9772: 9768: 9763: 9759: 9755: 9751: 9747: 9743: 9739: 9735: 9731: 9727: 9723: 9722: 9721: 9720: 9716: 9712: 9708: 9705: 9703: 9702: 9697: 9692: 9690: 9683: 9675: 9671: 9667: 9663: 9660: 9656: 9652: 9648: 9644: 9640: 9637: 9635: 9631: 9627: 9621: 9619: 9615: 9612: 9608: 9607: 9605: 9597: 9593: 9590: 9587: 9585: 9581: 9575: 9570: 9567: 9565: 9561: 9555: 9554: 9552: 9544: 9541: 9540: 9537: 9533: 9529: 9524: 9523: 9522: 9521: 9517: 9513: 9512:William Avery 9509: 9505: 9504: 9499: 9498: 9493: 9492: 9487: 9483: 9482: 9477: 9473: 9472: 9463: 9459: 9454: 9453: 9449: 9445: 9444:Peter coxhead 9441: 9431: 9430: 9426: 9422: 9418: 9414: 9402: 9399: 9395: 9390: 9381: 9380: 9379: 9378: 9374: 9370: 9366: 9362: 9355: 9346: 9342: 9338: 9334: 9333: 9328: 9327: 9326: 9322: 9318: 9312: 9306: 9305: 9304: 9303: 9299: 9295: 9291: 9284: 9279: 9278: 9274: 9270: 9262: 9258: 9255: 9251: 9247: 9244: 9240: 9239: 9238: 9236: 9231: 9229: 9228:like this one 9214: 9210: 9206: 9202: 9198: 9197: 9196: 9192: 9188: 9184: 9181: 9180: 9179: 9178: 9174: 9170: 9163: 9156: 9152: 9148: 9147: 9146:Utecha trivia 9137: 9136: 9132: 9128: 9103: 9099: 9095: 9094:Chiswick Chap 9091: 9090: 9089: 9088: 9087: 9083: 9079: 9075: 9071: 9066: 9065: 9064: 9060: 9056: 9055:Chiswick Chap 9052: 9048: 9047: 9046: 9045: 9044: 9043: 9042: 9041: 9034: 9030: 9026: 9022: 9018: 9017:Stingless bee 9014: 9010: 9004: 8996: 8991: 8990: 8989: 8985: 8981: 8977: 8973: 8972: 8971: 8970: 8967: 8963: 8959: 8955: 8949: 8944: 8943: 8942: 8941: 8937: 8933: 8922: 8921: 8917: 8913: 8907: 8905: 8901: 8897: 8893: 8889: 8885: 8881: 8876: 8874: 8871: 8868: 8864: 8860: 8857: 8854: 8850: 8846: 8843: 8840: 8836: 8835:Chiswick Chap 8830: 8828: 8824: 8820: 8809: 8808: 8804: 8800: 8796: 8795: 8790: 8786: 8772: 8768: 8764: 8760: 8756: 8755: 8754: 8753: 8750: 8746: 8742: 8738: 8734: 8732: 8728: 8724: 8719: 8715: 8714: 8713: 8712: 8707: 8703: 8697: 8685: 8680: 8676: 8670: 8664: 8663: 8662: 8661: 8657: 8653: 8649: 8645: 8641: 8640:Blatta Indica 8637: 8633: 8629: 8625: 8621: 8611: 8610: 8606: 8602: 8598: 8593: 8589: 8583: 8565: 8561: 8557: 8551: 8546: 8545: 8544: 8540: 8536: 8532: 8528: 8527: 8526: 8522: 8518: 8512: 8507: 8506: 8505: 8501: 8497: 8490: 8486: 8482: 8478: 8474: 8470: 8466: 8462: 8461:carabidae.org 8456: 8451: 8450: 8449: 8448: 8444: 8440: 8436: 8432: 8431: 8426: 8425: 8416: 8415: 8410: 8409: 8395: 8391: 8387: 8382: 8378: 8374: 8369: 8365: 8361: 8356: 8355: 8354: 8351: 8348: 8343: 8336: 8334: 8330: 8327: 8324: 8320: 8316: 8312: 8311: 8310: 8306: 8302: 8301:Chiswick Chap 8297: 8296: 8295: 8292: 8289: 8284: 8277: 8265: 8261: 8257: 8256:Chiswick Chap 8253: 8251: 8247: 8243: 8238: 8237: 8236: 8235: 8234: 8233: 8232: 8231: 8230: 8229: 8228: 8227: 8226: 8225: 8221: 8206: 8202: 8198: 8197: 8196: 8192: 8188: 8187:Chiswick Chap 8184: 8183: 8182: 8178: 8174: 8170: 8169: 8164: 8163: 8162: 8158: 8154: 8153:Chiswick Chap 8149: 8148: 8147: 8146: 8145: 8144: 8140: 8136: 8131: 8129: 8125: 8124: 8119: 8118: 8113: 8112: 8101: 8099: 8095: 8091: 8087: 8074: 8073: 8069: 8065: 8064:Chiswick Chap 8061: 8054: 8046: 8041: 8037: 8031: 8028:) leading to 8027: 8023: 8019: 8018: 8017: 8015: 8011: 8007: 8003: 7997: 7993: 7989: 7975: 7971: 7967: 7955: 7950: 7949: 7948: 7947: 7946: 7939: 7934: 7930: 7925: 7922: 7911: 7909: 7905: 7901: 7896: 7895: 7888: 7884: 7880: 7875: 7871: 7866: 7862: 7861: 7860: 7856: 7852: 7848: 7847: 7846: 7842: 7838: 7834: 7830: 7829: 7824: 7820: 7816: 7812: 7810: 7806: 7802: 7797: 7796: 7795: 7794: 7791: 7787: 7783: 7776: 7766: 7756: 7749: 7745: 7744: 7743: 7736: 7731: 7727: 7702: 7698: 7694: 7690: 7689: 7688: 7684: 7680: 7676: 7672: 7668: 7664: 7663: 7658: 7657: 7650: 7645: 7644: 7643: 7642: 7638: 7634: 7608: 7607: 7603: 7599: 7595: 7590: 7588: 7583: 7577: 7568: 7565: 7561: 7558: 7557: 7556: 7553: 7551: 7543: 7540:will post on 7538: 7533: 7529: 7517: 7513: 7509: 7505: 7504:Chiswick Chap 7501: 7492: 7491: 7490: 7489: 7485: 7481: 7471: 7467: 7463: 7459: 7454: 7450: 7445: 7441: 7437: 7433: 7429: 7428: 7416: 7410: 7409: 7404: 7402: 7398: 7394: 7389: 7388: 7387: 7383: 7379: 7375: 7374: 7369: 7368: 7367: 7366: 7363: 7358: 7345: 7341: 7337: 7329: 7318: 7317: 7313: 7309: 7305: 7287: 7283: 7279: 7273: 7268: 7267: 7266: 7265: 7264: 7263: 7262: 7261: 7254: 7250: 7246: 7240: 7235: 7234: 7233: 7232: 7231: 7230: 7223: 7219: 7215: 7208: 7203: 7202: 7201: 7197: 7193: 7186: 7181: 7180: 7179: 7178: 7177: 7176: 7172: 7168: 7164: 7158: 7152: 7151: 7147: 7143: 7139: 7134: 7129: 7117: 7113: 7109: 7108:Chiswick Chap 7105: 7104: 7103: 7102: 7101: 7100: 7096: 7092: 7086: 7084: 7080: 7076: 7072: 7067: 7064: 7060: 7050: 7049: 7046: 7043: 7038: 7032: 7031: 7022: 7017: 7016: 7013: 6994:. 2016-06-15. 6993: 6989: 6983: 6974: 6969: 6965: 6961: 6957: 6950: 6946: 6943: 6941: 6937: 6927: 6924: 6920: 6916: 6913: 6912: 6901: 6898: 6895: 6894: 6886: 6883: 6881: 6877: 6876: 6871: 6867: 6866: 6860: 6855: 6851: 6850: 6843: 6842: 6836: 6835: 6832: 6831: 6826: 6819: 6818: 6813: 6812: 6807: 6806: 6796: 6795: 6791: 6787: 6783: 6779: 6775: 6774:Lepidopterist 6771: 6770: 6759: 6758: 6754: 6750: 6746: 6742: 6738: 6730: 6726: 6717: 6716: 6712: 6708: 6704: 6703: 6695: 6694:Ralph Hopping 6689: 6687: 6681: 6676: 6673: 6670: 6665: 6662: 6661: 6660: 6658: 6657: 6650: 6649:one-time-only 6645: 6643: 6642: 6633: 6622: 6618: 6614: 6610: 6609: 6608: 6607: 6603: 6599: 6595: 6594: 6583: 6582: 6578: 6574: 6570: 6567: 6562: 6561: 6557: 6556: 6555: 6552: 6550: 6537: 6533: 6529: 6525: 6521: 6520:Kerry Britton 6517: 6513: 6512: 6511: 6510: 6506: 6502: 6498: 6494: 6490: 6483: 6482: 6470: 6463: 6459: 6458: 6457: 6453: 6449: 6448:Chiswick Chap 6445: 6441: 6437: 6436: 6435: 6434: 6433: 6432: 6424: 6412: 6408: 6404: 6403:Chiswick Chap 6400: 6399: 6392: 6388: 6384: 6380: 6379: 6378: 6374: 6370: 6367: 6364: 6363: 6362: 6361: 6355: 6354: 6353: 6352: 6349: 6345: 6341: 6337: 6332: 6331: 6330: 6329: 6325: 6321: 6317: 6314: 6310: 6308: 6304: 6300: 6288: 6284: 6280: 6276: 6272: 6268: 6265:Looks like a 6262: 6257: 6256: 6255: 6254: 6250: 6246: 6241: 6240: 6236: 6216: 6212: 6208: 6204: 6203: 6202: 6198: 6194: 6189: 6185: 6182: 6179: 6176: 6173: 6170: 6169: 6167: 6166: 6165: 6161: 6157: 6152: 6148: 6147: 6146: 6142: 6138: 6133: 6132: 6131: 6127: 6123: 6118: 6117: 6116: 6112: 6108: 6103: 6102: 6101: 6100: 6096: 6092: 6088: 6084: 6074: 6073: 6069: 6065: 6064:John Cummings 6060: 6057: 6055: 6051: 6047: 6037: 6034: 6030: 6026: 6020: 6015: 6014: 6013: 6012: 6009: 6006: 6001: 5995: 5985: 5984: 5980: 5976: 5972: 5971:Muisca people 5968: 5967: 5958: 5957: 5949: 5945: 5941: 5937: 5936: 5935: 5934: 5931: 5927: 5923: 5921: 5917: 5912: 5910: 5906: 5899: 5891: 5889: 5885: 5881: 5878:'Knowledge'; 5876: 5863: 5859: 5855: 5851: 5847: 5843: 5838: 5837: 5836: 5835: 5834: 5833: 5829: 5825: 5817: 5801: 5797: 5793: 5788: 5787: 5784:subprojects). 5782: 5781: 5776: 5775: 5762: 5761: 5756: 5755: 5750: 5746: 5745: 5740: 5739: 5738: 5737: 5731: 5730: 5726: 5725: 5721: 5717: 5712: 5706: 5700: 5686: 5685: 5681: 5677: 5673: 5668: 5653: 5650: 5646: 5642: 5638: 5634: 5630: 5626: 5622: 5618: 5613: 5612: 5611: 5607: 5603: 5599: 5598: 5597: 5593: 5589: 5585: 5584: 5579: 5575: 5574: 5573: 5572: 5569: 5565: 5561: 5557: 5550: 5543: 5539: 5535: 5531: 5530: 5522:subcategories 5521: 5511: 5507: 5503: 5499: 5495: 5489: 5485: 5484: 5483: 5482: 5478: 5474: 5461: 5457: 5453: 5448: 5447: 5446: 5442: 5438: 5437:Chiswick Chap 5434: 5430: 5426: 5425: 5424: 5423: 5422: 5421: 5416: 5412: 5408: 5403: 5402: 5401: 5400: 5397: 5394: 5390: 5386: 5378: 5372: 5366: 5360: 5354: 5348: 5347: 5345: 5344: 5343: 5342: 5338: 5334: 5330: 5326: 5322: 5307: 5304: 5300: 5296: 5294: 5291: 5288: 5283: 5277: 5276: 5275: 5271: 5267: 5260: 5255: 5250: 5249: 5248: 5247: 5244: 5240: 5236: 5232: 5228: 5219: 5215: 5211: 5203: 5202: 5201: 5197: 5193: 5176: 5169: 5164: 5152: 5149: 5145: 5141: 5140: 5139: 5135: 5131: 5124: 5083: 5079: 5078: 5077: 5073: 5069: 5064: 5063: 5062: 5058: 5054: 5050: 5049: 5048: 5044: 5040: 5035: 5034: 5033: 5029: 5025: 5018: 4992: 4980: 4976: 4972: 4968: 4964: 4960: 4950: 4944: 4943: 4942: 4941: 4938: 4934: 4930: 4926: 4920: 4913: 4911: 4897: 4893: 4889: 4888:Chiswick Chap 4885: 4881: 4880: 4879: 4875: 4871: 4867: 4863: 4862: 4861: 4860: 4856: 4852: 4851:Chiswick Chap 4848: 4844: 4840: 4836: 4822: 4818: 4814: 4810: 4805: 4804: 4803: 4800: 4796: 4792: 4788: 4784: 4778: 4773: 4771: 4768: 4765: 4760: 4753: 4752: 4751: 4750: 4746: 4742: 4738: 4734: 4730: 4726: 4720: 4713: 4706: 4699: 4685: 4681: 4677: 4672: 4668: 4664: 4660: 4659:Chiswick Chap 4656: 4655: 4654: 4651: 4647: 4642: 4638: 4634: 4631: 4627: 4623: 4619: 4615: 4614: 4613: 4609: 4605: 4600: 4599: 4598: 4594: 4590: 4585: 4584: 4583: 4579: 4575: 4570: 4569: 4568: 4567: 4563: 4559: 4548: 4547: 4543: 4539: 4531: 4527: 4517: 4516: 4512: 4508: 4504: 4497: 4491: 4490: 4485: 4481: 4475: 4474: 4469: 4464: 4462: 4461:their website 4458: 4457: 4451: 4448: 4439: 4415: 4411: 4407: 4402: 4401: 4400: 4396: 4392: 4387: 4386: 4385: 4381: 4377: 4372: 4368: 4364: 4360: 4356: 4355: 4354: 4350: 4346: 4341: 4340: 4339: 4335: 4331: 4327: 4326: 4325: 4321: 4317: 4313: 4308: 4307: 4306: 4302: 4298: 4294: 4293: 4292: 4288: 4284: 4280: 4276: 4275: 4274: 4270: 4266: 4261: 4260: 4259: 4258: 4254: 4250: 4245: 4236: 4233: 4229: 4225: 4221: 4217: 4210: 4198: 4195: 4191: 4187: 4183: 4179: 4178: 4177: 4176: 4172: 4168: 4158: 4157: 4154: 4147: 4146: 4142: 4138: 4134: 4130: 4113: 4109: 4105: 4101: 4100: 4099: 4095: 4091: 4087: 4086: 4085: 4081: 4077: 4072: 4070: 4066: 4062: 4057: 4056: 4055: 4051: 4047: 4042: 4039: 4038: 4037: 4033: 4029: 4025: 4023: 4019: 4015: 4010: 4009: 4008: 4004: 4000: 3995: 3991: 3990: 3989: 3988: 3984: 3980: 3969: 3965: 3961: 3960:Chiswick Chap 3957: 3956: 3955: 3954: 3953: 3952: 3947: 3943: 3939: 3935: 3934: 3933: 3932: 3926: 3925: 3924: 3923: 3916: 3912: 3908: 3907:Chiswick Chap 3904: 3900: 3899: 3898: 3897: 3896: 3895: 3882: 3878: 3877: 3876: 3875: 3874: 3873: 3872: 3871: 3870: 3869: 3861: 3860: 3857: 3856: 3855: 3854: 3848: 3844: 3841: 3840: 3839: 3838: 3835: 3831: 3827: 3826:Chiswick Chap 3822: 3818: 3814: 3813: 3812: 3811: 3807: 3803: 3798: 3794: 3785: 3784: 3780: 3776: 3775: 3769: 3767: 3766: 3760: 3758: 3750: 3749: 3744: 3740: 3727: 3723: 3719: 3714: 3713: 3712: 3708: 3703: 3693: 3688: 3681: 3678: 3674: 3671: 3667: 3663: 3659: 3658: 3657: 3656: 3652: 3648: 3644: 3632: 3629: 3625: 3621: 3617: 3616: 3615: 3614: 3610: 3609: 3607: 3602: 3597: 3591: 3589: 3585: 3575: 3574: 3569: 3562: 3556: 3538: 3534: 3530: 3525: 3520: 3516: 3515: 3514: 3513: 3512: 3511: 3510: 3509: 3502: 3498: 3494: 3490: 3487: 3486: 3485: 3481: 3477: 3472: 3471: 3470: 3466: 3462: 3458: 3454: 3453: 3452: 3451: 3447: 3443: 3439: 3429: 3428: 3425: 3420: 3417: 3411: 3407: 3403: 3395: 3391: 3387: 3381: 3374: 3371: 3367: 3363: 3359: 3355: 3351: 3347: 3346: 3345: 3341: 3337: 3333: 3332: 3331: 3330: 3326: 3322: 3316: 3309: 3302: 3294: 3290: 3286: 3282: 3276: 3260: 3257: 3253: 3249: 3248: 3247: 3243: 3239: 3234: 3233: 3232: 3228: 3224: 3220: 3216: 3208: 3203: 3202: 3201: 3200: 3196: 3192: 3186: 3184: 3180: 3174: 3163: 3162: 3158: 3154: 3145: 3141: 3140: 3136: 3132: 3122: 3121: 3117: 3113: 3109: 3108: 3099: 3094: 3089: 3085: 3081: 3077: 3076: 3073: 3068: 3065: 3059: 3055: 3051: 3044: 3032: 3031: 3025: 3021: 3019:9780565007867 3016: 3012: 3007: 3003: 3001:9780813506869 2998: 2994: 2989: 2985: 2982: 2978: 2974: 2969: 2965: 2962: 2958: 2954: 2947: 2942: 2938: 2934: 2930: 2926: 2921: 2920: 2919: 2918: 2914: 2910: 2906: 2894: 2890: 2886: 2882: 2881: 2880: 2876: 2872: 2868: 2864: 2857: 2850: 2845: 2844: 2840: 2836: 2831: 2827: 2823: 2819: 2809: 2808: 2805: 2801: 2797: 2793: 2789: 2781: 2774: 2769: 2768: 2764: 2760: 2757: 2752: 2742: 2741: 2737: 2733: 2729: 2725: 2721: 2717: 2695: 2691: 2687: 2682: 2681: 2680: 2676: 2672: 2668: 2666: 2662: 2658: 2654: 2650: 2646: 2645: 2644: 2640: 2636: 2629: 2624: 2623: 2622: 2618: 2614: 2608: 2603: 2602: 2601: 2597: 2593: 2588: 2587: 2586: 2582: 2578: 2573: 2572: 2563: 2559: 2555: 2548: 2543: 2542: 2541: 2537: 2533: 2528: 2527: 2526: 2522: 2518: 2513: 2509: 2503: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2492: 2488: 2483: 2478: 2474: 2473: 2464: 2460: 2456: 2452: 2447: 2442: 2438: 2434: 2430: 2423: 2413: 2406: 2402: 2398: 2391: 2386: 2385: 2384: 2380: 2376: 2371: 2367: 2361: 2356: 2355: 2354: 2350: 2346: 2342: 2338: 2334: 2327: 2317: 2310: 2306: 2300: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2289: 2285: 2281: 2276: 2270: 2265: 2264: 2263: 2262: 2258: 2254: 2248: 2247: 2243: 2239: 2235: 2230: 2226: 2222: 2217: 2213: 2208: 2203: 2199: 2195: 2190: 2173: 2169: 2165: 2159: 2150: 2145: 2144: 2143: 2139: 2135: 2131: 2127: 2126: 2125: 2121: 2117: 2113: 2112: 2105: 2100: 2096: 2092: 2088: 2084: 2083: 2082: 2078: 2074: 2070: 2069:Ichneumonidae 2064: 2059: 2058: 2057: 2053: 2049: 2044: 2043: 2042: 2038: 2034: 2030: 2023: 2015: 2010: 2009: 2008: 2004: 2000: 1995: 1994: 1993: 1992: 1988: 1984: 1979: 1964: 1960: 1956: 1950: 1945: 1943: 1939: 1935: 1930: 1929: 1928: 1927: 1924: 1920: 1916: 1911: 1907: 1903: 1902: 1887: 1883: 1879: 1875: 1872: 1871: 1870: 1866: 1862: 1855: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1842: 1838: 1833: 1829: 1825: 1821: 1815: 1810: 1809: 1808: 1804: 1800: 1796: 1790: 1785: 1784: 1783: 1779: 1775: 1771: 1767: 1761: 1756: 1755: 1754: 1750: 1746: 1741: 1740: 1739: 1738: 1733: 1729: 1725: 1722:subsection.-- 1718: 1713: 1712: 1711: 1707: 1703: 1696: 1688: 1680: 1672: 1664: 1656: 1651: 1650: 1645: 1641: 1637: 1633: 1632: 1631: 1627: 1623: 1619: 1618: 1617: 1616: 1612: 1608: 1604: 1600: 1596: 1573: 1569: 1565: 1560: 1559: 1558: 1554: 1550: 1546: 1545: 1544: 1543: 1542: 1541: 1540: 1539: 1538: 1537: 1536: 1535: 1534: 1533: 1532: 1531: 1511: 1507: 1503: 1500: 1497: 1493: 1492: 1487: 1482: 1481: 1480: 1476: 1472: 1467: 1466: 1465: 1461: 1457: 1452: 1451: 1450: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1443: 1442: 1441: 1426: 1425: 1424: 1420: 1416: 1410: 1402: 1394: 1386: 1378: 1370: 1362: 1354: 1346: 1338: 1337:Phil Northing 1332: 1328: 1324: 1318: 1313: 1312: 1311: 1307: 1303: 1299: 1295: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1285: 1281: 1277: 1270: 1260: 1252: 1246: 1240: 1233: 1228: 1227: 1226: 1222: 1218: 1213: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1205: 1202: 1198: 1194: 1187: 1182: 1180: 1176: 1172: 1165: 1160: 1159: 1146: 1142: 1138: 1131: 1126: 1125: 1124: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1102: 1098: 1094: 1088: 1083: 1082: 1080: 1076: 1072: 1071:inadvertently 1068: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1059: 1054: 1050: 1046: 1040: 1032: 1024: 1016: 1008: 1002: 998: 994: 987: 982: 981: 980: 976: 972: 968: 963: 958: 954: 950: 945: 942: 939: 938: 937:lists a few: 936: 932: 931: 920: 916: 912: 906: 901: 900: 899: 895: 891: 886: 885: 884: 880: 876: 872: 868: 861: 856: 855: 854: 850: 846: 841: 837: 834: 833: 832: 828: 824: 820: 816: 812: 805: 800: 799: 798: 797: 793: 789: 759: 755: 751: 747: 743: 742: 741: 740: 739: 738: 737: 733: 729: 723: 715: 707: 699: 691: 684: 683: 682: 678: 674: 670: 666: 660: 655: 654: 653: 652: 651: 650: 649: 645: 641: 636: 632: 631: 630: 626: 622: 617: 616: 615: 611: 607: 603: 599: 592: 584: 579: 578: 577: 573: 569: 564: 563: 562: 561: 558: 554: 550: 545: 544: 539: 538: 533: 532: 527: 526: 525: 524: 520: 516: 512: 501: 497: 493: 488: 487: 486: 485: 481: 477: 473: 463: 462: 458: 454: 450: 445: 441: 437: 433: 426:Cochineal FAR 413: 409: 405: 401: 400: 399: 398: 397: 393: 389: 385: 381: 377: 373: 372: 371: 370: 369: 368: 367: 366: 362: 358: 355: 352:best regards 350: 349: 345: 335: 334: 330: 326: 316: 307: 306: 302: 301: 297: 292: 285: 284: 277: 276: 272: 271: 269: 264: 259: 253: 251: 247: 231: 227: 223: 219: 215: 211: 207: 206: 201: 197: 193: 189: 185: 181: 180: 174: 173: 172: 171: 170: 169: 164: 160: 156: 151: 150: 149: 145: 141: 136: 132: 128: 122: 117: 116: 115: 114: 110: 106: 100: 94: 87: 78: 75: 72: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 10311: 10304: 10266: 10215: 10180: 10142: 10131: 10119: 10092:— Preceding 10077: 10055: 10051: 10031: 10027: 10023: 9995: 9989: 9987: 9962: 9947: 9944:Thank you. 9943: 9936: 9929: 9926: 9923: 9916: 9909: 9897: 9895: 9888: 9886: 9872: 9869: 9866: 9862: 9817: 9809: 9805: 9749: 9745: 9737: 9729: 9725: 9709: 9706: 9699: 9695: 9693: 9686: 9681: 9633: 9629: 9625: 9623: 9610: 9599: 9583: 9579: 9577: 9563: 9559: 9557: 9546: 9501: 9495: 9489: 9479: 9476:User:Qbugbot 9469: 9467: 9461: 9457: 9437: 9410: 9388: 9358: 9330: 9289: 9287: 9266: 9260: 9253: 9249: 9242: 9232: 9224: 9144: 9143: 9123: 8928: 8908: 8884:Archostemata 8877: 8869: 8855: 8841: 8831: 8815: 8792: 8782: 8758: 8736: 8693: 8639: 8635: 8617: 8579: 8530: 8492:Panzer, 1810 8488: 8484: 8480: 8476: 8472: 8468: 8464: 8428: 8422: 8420: 8412: 8406: 8367: 8363: 8325: 8217: 8166: 8132: 8127: 8121: 8115: 8109: 8107: 8084:— Preceding 8080: 8057: 8029: 8025: 8006:68.189.155.8 8000:— Preceding 7985: 7929:I'm so tired 7926: 7918: 7869: 7832: 7719: 7675:B. impatiens 7674: 7671:B. impatiens 7670: 7666: 7660: 7654: 7630: 7591: 7572: 7554: 7525: 7499: 7476: 7406: 7393:Kingofaces43 7371: 7350:Thank you. 7349: 7328:Kingofaces43 7324: 7301: 7162: 7153: 7133:Tansy Beetle 7130: 7127: 7091:Kingofaces43 7087: 7068: 7056: 7028: 7026: 7020: 7008:T.Shafee(Evo 7006: 6992:The Signpost 6991: 6982: 6963: 6959: 6949: 6933: 6884: 6879: 6873: 6863: 6861: 6839: 6821: 6815: 6809: 6803: 6802: 6768: 6765: 6734: 6700: 6698: 6680:Stevietheman 6677: 6674: 6671: 6668: 6652: 6648: 6646: 6640: 6639: 6637: 6591: 6589: 6586:Proofreading 6571: 6568: 6565: 6558: 6553: 6545: 6495:(died 1934) 6486: 6479: 6462:nuptial gift 6444:Vampire Moth 6420: 6383:Kingofaces43 6340:Kingofaces43 6318: 6315: 6311: 6306: 6302: 6296: 6242: 6237: 6234: 6207:Kingofaces43 6137:Kingofaces43 6107:Kingofaces43 6080: 6061: 6058: 6048: 6045: 6025:ResearchGate 5994:Ceratomyrmex 5993: 5991: 5964: 5961: 5954: 5924: 5913: 5892: 5873: 5809: 5692: 5676:70.51.200.96 5663: 5660:"Usurpation" 5636: 5581: 5548: 5541: 5533: 5527: 5525: 5492:— Preceding 5470: 5432: 5428: 5317: 5224: 5013:|class=Draft 4993:containing: 4973:, C, Start, 4914: 4907: 4832: 4694: 4629: 4604:Kingofaces43 4574:Kingofaces43 4554: 4523: 4500: 4471: 4467: 4465: 4454: 4453: 4444: 4406:Kingofaces43 4330:Kingofaces43 4297:Kingofaces43 4265:Kingofaces43 4249:Kingofaces43 4242: 4214:— Preceding 4206: 4164: 4148: 4127:Well now it 4126: 3976: 3902: 3880: 3820: 3791: 3772: 3770: 3763: 3761: 3756: 3754: 3746: 3742: 3701: 3686: 3676: 3669: 3640: 3605: 3604: 3592: 3581: 3552: 3476:Kingofaces43 3435: 3409: 3405: 3401: 3399: 3393: 3389: 3350:Kingofaces43 3284: 3272: 3238:Kingofaces43 3207:WP:TASKFORCE 3187: 3169: 3150: 3128: 3105: 3103: 3097: 3092: 3047: 3029: 3010: 2992: 2976: 2972: 2959:(1): 1–116. 2956: 2952: 2928: 2924: 2904: 2902: 2861:— Preceding 2853: 2815: 2785: 2755: 2748: 2713: 2657:Kingofaces43 2653:indefinitely 2577:Kingofaces43 2511: 2507: 2481: 2476: 2446:tangentially 2445: 2440: 2436: 2433:WP:PROJSCOPE 2365: 2336: 2316:Category TOC 2280:WP:CONSENSUS 2249: 2233: 2228: 2224: 2220: 2201: 2197: 2193: 2186: 2149:Kingofaces43 2134:Kingofaces43 2109: 2087:Kingofaces43 2063:Kingofaces43 2048:Kingofaces43 2022:Kingofaces43 1983:Kingofaces43 1978:WP:TASKFORCE 1974: 1949:Kingofaces43 1915:Kingofaces43 1909: 1905: 1854:Kingofaces43 1837:Kingofaces43 1769: 1765: 1760:Kingofaces43 1745:Kingofaces43 1679:Kingofaces43 1636:Kingofaces43 1595:17,675 pages 1592: 1509: 1456:Kingofaces43 1369:Ruigeroeland 1326: 1322: 1321:Saying that 1317:Kingofaces43 1302:Kingofaces43 1238: 1232:Kingofaces43 1217:Kingofaces43 1130:Kingofaces43 1115:Kingofaces43 1110: 1092: 1070: 1066: 1000: 996: 992: 966: 961: 956: 905:Kingofaces43 890:Kingofaces43 870: 866: 860:Kingofaces43 845:Kingofaces43 839: 836:WP:PROJSCOPE 818: 814: 810: 804:Kingofaces43 788:Kingofaces43 784: 744: 690:Ruigeroeland 659:Kingofaces43 640:Kingofaces43 621:Kingofaces43 583:Kingofaces43 568:Kingofaces43 515:Kingofaces43 509: 469: 448: 429: 375: 357:I'm so tired 351: 341: 321: 299: 296:CaroleHenson 288: 281: 267: 266: 254: 243: 217: 213: 209: 203: 199: 195: 191: 187: 183: 177: 134: 90: 70: 43: 37: 10192:Bob Webster 10098:Rikmwouters 9969:Narky Blert 9917:There's an 9666:Bob Webster 9528:Bob Webster 9486:User:Polbot 9438:Please see 9311:Arpingstone 9254:endorsement 9205:Narky Blert 9183:Heteroptera 9169:Narky Blert 8863:Hectonichus 8812:WP: BEETLES 8421:Hello, are 8168:Aphis fabae 8053:Grasshopper 7960:instead of 7921:lepidoptera 7833:recommended 7713:Speciesbox? 7598:Johan (WMF) 7163:C. herbacea 6735:Yesterday, 6707:Narky Blert 6684:Delivered: 6501:Narky Blert 6423:Hematophagy 6275:iNaturalist 5988:Pdf request 5940:Burklemore1 5920:Burklemore1 5909:bookmarklet 5742:categories. 5602:Burklemore1 5545:Buren, 1972 5297:Thanks! :) 5172:Edits like 4989:and create 4921:|SATF=yes}} 4719:Burklemore1 4530:bot request 4480:Checkingfax 4044:seem good? 3903:M. xxxxxxxx 3748:Dryas iulia 3618:Thank you, 3519:Anne Delong 3493:Anne Delong 3442:Anne Delong 3336:Burklemore1 3308:Burklemore1 3209:concludes, 3112:Burklemore1 3084:Leptotarsus 2833:present).-- 2759:Burklemore1 2360:Animalparty 2269:Animalparty 1971:Task forces 1695:Burklemore1 1508:especially 1486:Burklemore1 1471:Burklemore1 1361:Burklemore1 1031:Burklemore1 476:Burklemore1 36:This is an 10242:Psocoptera 10150:Apterygota 9906:Background 9758:Tachininae 9634:Nemapalpus 9630:Nemapalpus 9626:Nemopalpus 9584:Nemopalpus 9580:Nemapalpus 9578:The genus 9564:Nemopalpus 9560:Nemapalpus 9494:(or is it 9481:Nemapalpus 9471:Nemopalpus 9462:Nemapalpus 9458:Nemopalpus 9261:Discussion 9074:Beekeeping 9003:Zelomorpha 8948:Zelomorpha 8932:Zelomorpha 8759:Arthropoda 8718:this paper 8550:Tisquesusa 8535:Tisquesusa 8377:gypsy moth 8205:Cwmhiraeth 8173:Cwmhiraeth 8135:Cwmhiraeth 7954:Colletidae 7952:icon--see 7596:, through 7415:PumpkinSky 6880:Wiki.J.Med 6784:. Cheers, 6741:her albums 6647:This is a 5975:Tisquesusa 5875:antcat.org 5842:wasp facts 5790:redirect. 5667:Usurpation 4866:see notice 4712:Cwmhiraeth 4526:discussion 4476:. Cheers! 3879:"A female 3151:Solved. -- 2732:Cwmhiraeth 2547:Stemonitis 2532:Stemonitis 2502:Stemonitis 2487:Stemonitis 2412:refimprove 2405:WP:TAGGING 2014:Stemonitis 1999:Stemonitis 1671:Stemonitis 1353:The Earwig 1294:WP:ILIKEIT 1251:WP:ILIKEIT 1087:Stemonitis 1075:Stemonitis 1015:The Earwig 997:disruption 986:Stemonitis 971:Stemonitis 200:P. pyralis 135:P. pyralis 10318:Plantdrew 10250:GTBacchus 10163:Plantdrew 10134:GTBacchus 9811:Adejeania 9806:Adaeudora 9754:Tachinini 9750:Adaeudora 9746:Adejeania 9740:based on 9738:Adejeania 9701:Adejeania 9689:Adaeudora 9682:Adaeudora 9503:Nemapalpa 9317:Plantdrew 9243:Volunteer 9201:WP:INTDAB 8976:Plantdrew 8958:Plantdrew 8892:Polyphaga 8888:Myxophaga 8849:Plantdrew 8763:Snorepion 8723:Plantdrew 8696:Arthropod 8636:Cancrelas 8517:DferDaisy 8455:DferDaisy 8439:DferDaisy 8319:Cas Liber 8201:Black fly 7874:Plantdrew 7837:Plantdrew 7801:Plantdrew 7693:Guettarda 7649:Guettarda 7633:Guettarda 7272:Plantdrew 7245:Plantdrew 7207:Plantdrew 7185:Plantdrew 7167:Plantdrew 7079:WP:WEIGHT 7059:Gamergate 6938:, or the 6844:promotion 6528:Plantdrew 6466:DrChrissy 6428:DrChrissy 6299:Sapygidae 6156:Plantdrew 5824:Plantdrew 5792:Plantdrew 5778:searches. 5617:Plantdrew 5588:Plantdrew 5554:). Ping: 5518:Multiple 5407:Plantdrew 5206:|class=na 5185:|class=na 5053:Plantdrew 4929:Redrose64 4503:talk page 4391:Plantdrew 4376:Plantdrew 4345:Plantdrew 4316:Plantdrew 4283:Plantdrew 4129:turns out 3821:Megachile 3797:Megachile 3664:from the 3396:, female? 3191:Plantdrew 3058:Dysmachus 2885:Plantdrew 2751:nominated 2724:Gryllidae 2451:consensus 2225:improving 2221:expanding 2198:potential 2111:competent 1878:Plantdrew 1655:Plantdrew 1607:Plantdrew 1603:289 pages 1564:Plantdrew 1245:Plantdrew 591:Plantdrew 549:Plantdrew 492:Plantdrew 432:Cochineal 404:Pahazzard 325:Pahazzard 222:Plantdrew 140:Plantdrew 77:Archive 4 71:Archive 3 65:Archive 2 60:Archive 1 10246:Psocodea 10106:contribs 10094:unsigned 9818:Simuliid 9782:through. 9762:Simuliid 9592:24321804 9468:We have 8912:Zakhx150 8894:, & 8880:Adephaga 8873:contribs 8859:contribs 8845:contribs 8679:contribs 8471:species 8381:silkworm 8368:Hoplitis 8329:contribs 8086:unsigned 8002:unsigned 7879:Zakhx150 7582:Mr.Z-bot 7576:Mr.Z-man 7480:Johnuniq 7278:Zakhx150 7239:Zakhx150 7214:Zakhx150 7192:Zakhx150 7157:Zakhx150 7142:Zakhx150 7128:Hi All, 6878:.. Like 6817:Neopalpa 6805:Neopalpa 6613:Totodu74 6598:Totodu74 6516:Cai Ping 6336:WP:SYNTH 6271:bugguide 5506:contribs 5494:unsigned 4524:After a 4468:one-year 4228:contribs 4216:unsigned 4040:I think 3743:Original 3620:Mr.Z-man 3560:Gamaliel 3400:Is this 3213:Perhaps 3107:Myrmecia 3098:Myrmecia 3088:Kadavoor 2875:contribs 2863:unsigned 2835:Lucas559 2804:RMCD bot 2728:Ensifera 2710:Crickets 1512:section. 1093:apparent 869:Is that 466:Copyedit 218:Photuris 214:Photinus 210:Photuris 205:Photuris 196:Photuris 192:Photinus 188:Photuris 184:Photinus 179:Photinus 10287:Umimmak 10060:Hummmla 10018:Hummmla 10002:Hummmla 9767:Umimmak 9696:nothing 9651:Umimmak 9488:; with 9421:Umimmak 9369:Mccapra 9337:Shyamal 9187:Shyamal 8861:), and 8799:Umimmak 8737:du jour 8669:Elmidae 8652:Cesdeva 8531:linnaei 8373:the MOS 7765:taxobox 7611:ID help 7449:protect 7444:history 7353:Pumpkin 7336:Dyanega 7061:ants). 6925:review) 6909:Authors 6891:Editors 6824:Schwede 6421:At the 6059:Thanks 6046:Hi all 6029:jonkerz 5926:jonkerz 5854:Shyamal 5766:|insect 5711:concern 5705:Shyamal 5645:jonkerz 5631:Thanks 5564:jonkerz 5389:jonkerz 5299:jonkerz 5239:jonkerz 5144:jonkerz 4933:jonkerz 4795:jonkerz 4698:Jonkerz 4646:jonkerz 4622:Apoidea 4532:to add 4239:Tagging 4190:jonkerz 4182:Kaldari 4180:Thanks 4167:Kaldari 4152:Elmidae 3979:Notafly 3718:Shyamal 3691:BSIDIAN 3624:jonkerz 3366:jonkerz 3319:enjoy! 3315:Jonkerz 3287:(120). 3252:jonkerz 3215:Jonkerz 3173:Agelaia 3054:Dyanega 3050:Shyamal 2984:2422093 2964:2421325 2686:Shyamal 2337:Carabus 1766:for now 1401:Notafly 1345:Shyamal 1007:Shyamal 957:quality 722:Notafly 452:Georgia 388:Shyamal 99:Example 39:archive 9728:, and 9604:palpus 9598:Using 9551:palpus 9545:Using 9398:(talk) 9250:please 9151:clavus 8827:Beetle 8485:linnei 8435:Panzer 8165:While 7453:delete 7081:, and 6780:, and 6749:Jarekt 6522:. See 6261:Waggie 6245:Waggie 6019:Kevmin 5916:Kevmin 5907:for a 5898:AntCat 5888:WP:COI 5884:output 5433:Bombus 5429:Bombus 5266:rose64 5192:rose64 5130:rose64 5112:class| 5094:class| 5024:rose64 5003:class| 4910:Here's 4886:then. 4705:Kevmin 4633:Apidae 4572:fine. 4473:WP:ASP 4365:, and 4220:Vowela 4186:Here's 3660:FWIW, 3410:Tramea 3301:Kevmin 3153:PetarM 3131:PetarM 2905:per se 2628:Mishae 2613:Mishae 2554:Mishae 2517:Mishae 2395:(e.g. 2390:Mishae 2375:Mishae 2299:Mishae 2284:Mishae 2194:actual 2164:Mishae 2116:Mishae 2033:Mishae 1861:Mishae 1814:Mishae 1799:Mishae 1724:Mishae 1687:Ashlin 1663:Mishae 1549:Mishae 1415:Mishae 1405:, and 1397:, and 1393:Dawynn 1280:Mishae 1212:WP:TPG 1193:Mishae 1186:AshLin 1171:AshLin 1164:Mishae 1137:Mishae 1097:Mishae 1067:anyone 1045:Mishae 1035:, and 1023:AshLin 911:Mishae 875:Mishae 871:CLEAR? 823:Mishae 750:Mishae 746:topic. 728:Mishae 718:, and 714:Dawynn 673:Mishae 633:Also, 606:Mishae 434:for a 300:(talk) 9589:JSTOR 9484:from 9474:from 9263:page. 8648:Ravet 8620:Ravet 8614:Ravet 8364:Osmia 7986:Both 7870:tried 7770:with 7526:We – 7470:views 7462:watch 7458:links 7308:Cliff 7010:& 6514:It's 6369:Robin 6320:Robin 5125:. -- 4630:think 4137:Gidip 4076:Gidip 4061:Gidip 4028:Gidip 4014:Gidip 3938:Gidip 3817:Gidip 3802:Gidip 3034:(PDF) 2981:JSTOR 2961:JSTOR 2949:(PDF) 2856:DEFRA 2649:Gug01 2635:Gug01 2607:Gug01 2592:Gug01 2158:Gug01 2104:Gug01 2073:Gug01 1955:Gug01 1820:Gug01 1789:Gug01 1774:Gug01 1717:Gug01 1702:Gug01 1622:Gug01 1409:Gug01 1377:Oculi 1325:and 1039:Gug01 698:Oculi 449:Sandy 155:Gug01 121:Gug01 105:Gug01 16:< 10322:talk 10291:talk 10276:talk 10224:talk 10196:talk 10167:talk 10102:talk 10064:talk 10054:and 10040:talk 10006:talk 9973:talk 9899:here 9890:here 9844:talk 9824:talk 9796:talk 9771:talk 9756:and 9742:this 9715:talk 9670:talk 9655:talk 9532:talk 9516:talk 9478:and 9448:talk 9425:talk 9415:and 9389:Done 9373:talk 9341:talk 9321:talk 9298:talk 9273:talk 9209:talk 9191:talk 9173:talk 9131:talk 9127:Ypna 9098:talk 9082:talk 9059:talk 9029:talk 8999:and 8984:talk 8962:talk 8936:talk 8916:talk 8867:talk 8853:talk 8839:talk 8803:talk 8767:talk 8745:talk 8727:talk 8675:talk 8656:talk 8632:here 8630:and 8628:here 8624:here 8605:talk 8592:NZST 8560:talk 8539:talk 8521:talk 8500:talk 8443:talk 8427:and 8411:and 8390:talk 8323:talk 8305:talk 8260:talk 8246:talk 8220:talk 8191:talk 8177:talk 8157:talk 8139:talk 8094:talk 8068:talk 8010:talk 7990:and 7970:talk 7933:talk 7904:talk 7883:talk 7855:talk 7841:talk 7819:talk 7805:talk 7786:talk 7750:for 7730:talk 7697:talk 7683:talk 7637:talk 7602:talk 7512:talk 7500:Done 7484:talk 7466:logs 7440:talk 7436:edit 7397:talk 7382:talk 7361:talk 7312:talk 7282:talk 7249:talk 7218:talk 7196:talk 7171:talk 7146:talk 7112:talk 7095:talk 7075:this 7012:Evo) 6862:The 6790:talk 6769:here 6753:talk 6711:talk 6617:talk 6602:talk 6577:talk 6532:talk 6524:here 6518:and 6505:talk 6499:... 6452:talk 6407:talk 6387:talk 6373:talk 6344:talk 6324:talk 6283:talk 6249:talk 6211:talk 6197:talk 6160:talk 6141:talk 6126:talk 6111:talk 6095:talk 6068:talk 6033:talk 5979:talk 5944:talk 5930:talk 5893:For 5858:talk 5850:diff 5846:wasp 5828:talk 5796:talk 5720:talk 5680:talk 5649:talk 5621:talk 5606:talk 5592:talk 5568:talk 5502:talk 5477:talk 5456:talk 5441:talk 5411:talk 5393:talk 5337:talk 5303:talk 5270:talk 5254:this 5243:talk 5233:and 5214:talk 5196:talk 5175:this 5148:talk 5134:talk 5072:talk 5057:talk 5043:talk 5028:talk 4975:Stub 4937:talk 4892:talk 4874:talk 4855:talk 4817:talk 4799:talk 4785:and 4745:talk 4680:talk 4663:talk 4650:talk 4626:bees 4608:talk 4593:talk 4578:talk 4562:talk 4542:talk 4511:talk 4484:Talk 4482:}} { 4478:{{u| 4410:talk 4395:talk 4380:talk 4349:talk 4334:talk 4320:talk 4301:talk 4287:talk 4269:talk 4253:talk 4224:talk 4194:talk 4171:talk 4141:talk 4108:talk 4094:talk 4080:talk 4065:talk 4050:talk 4032:talk 4018:talk 4003:talk 3983:talk 3964:talk 3942:talk 3911:talk 3847:here 3843:Here 3830:talk 3806:talk 3779:talk 3774:Cirt 3722:talk 3651:talk 3628:talk 3567:talk 3555:here 3533:talk 3497:talk 3480:talk 3465:talk 3446:talk 3370:talk 3354:talk 3340:talk 3325:talk 3256:talk 3242:talk 3227:talk 3195:talk 3157:talk 3135:talk 3116:talk 3104:The 3015:ISBN 2997:ISBN 2913:talk 2889:talk 2871:talk 2839:talk 2800:here 2763:talk 2736:talk 2690:talk 2675:talk 2661:talk 2647:FYI 2639:talk 2617:talk 2596:talk 2581:talk 2558:talk 2536:talk 2521:talk 2510:and 2491:talk 2459:talk 2379:talk 2349:talk 2288:talk 2257:talk 2242:talk 2229:more 2223:and 2168:talk 2138:talk 2120:talk 2091:talk 2077:talk 2052:talk 2037:talk 2018:and 2003:talk 1987:talk 1959:talk 1938:talk 1919:talk 1882:talk 1865:talk 1841:talk 1824:talk 1803:talk 1778:talk 1749:talk 1728:talk 1706:talk 1640:talk 1626:talk 1611:talk 1568:talk 1553:talk 1475:talk 1460:talk 1419:talk 1306:talk 1284:talk 1274:use 1264:and 1221:talk 1197:talk 1175:talk 1141:talk 1119:talk 1111:this 1101:talk 1079:talk 1049:talk 975:talk 915:talk 894:talk 879:talk 849:talk 827:talk 817:not 815:most 792:talk 754:talk 732:talk 677:talk 665:this 644:talk 625:talk 610:talk 587:and 572:talk 553:talk 519:talk 496:talk 480:talk 457:Talk 444:here 408:talk 392:talk 361:talk 329:talk 226:talk 159:talk 144:talk 109:talk 10161:). 9639:doi 9614:doi 9600:Nem 9569:doi 9547:Nem 9460:or 9394:PMC 9237:. 8847:), 8787:or 8694:At 8469:sub 8379:or 8346:min 8341:Kev 8287:min 8282:Kev 7548:of 7356:Sky 7332:or 7041:min 7036:Kev 7023:rfc 6968:doi 6489:Cai 6004:min 5999:Kev 5886:). 5768:in 5674:-- 5547:vs 5286:min 5281:Kev 5264:Red 5190:Red 5128:Red 5115:}}} 5109:{{{ 5097:}}} 5091:{{{ 5022:Red 5006:}}} 5000:{{{ 4763:min 4758:Kev 4281:). 3768:. 3706:OUL 3608:man 3601:Mr. 3527:) 3517:Hi 3455:It 3392:or 3289:doi 3275:Ant 3086:of 2933:doi 2802:. — 2439:vs 2437:And 2422:POV 2417:or 2321:or 2307:or 2234:and 2202:not 2196:or 2031:.-- 1910:add 1298:ANI 967:not 819:all 671:!-- 270:man 263:Mr. 186:by 10324:) 10316:. 10293:) 10278:) 10226:) 10198:) 10169:) 10129:. 10108:) 10104:• 10066:) 10042:) 10008:) 9975:) 9946:— 9941:. 9934:. 9921:. 9893:. 9884:. 9882:}} 9876:{{ 9846:) 9798:) 9773:) 9717:) 9672:) 9657:) 9534:) 9518:) 9450:) 9427:) 9396:♠ 9375:) 9343:) 9323:) 9300:) 9275:) 9211:) 9193:) 9175:) 9165:}} 9162:dn 9159:{{ 9133:) 9100:) 9084:) 9076:. 9061:) 9031:) 8986:) 8964:) 8938:) 8918:) 8890:, 8886:, 8882:, 8805:) 8769:) 8747:) 8729:) 8706:⌨ 8677:· 8666:-- 8658:) 8607:) 8562:) 8541:) 8523:) 8502:) 8445:) 8392:) 8331:) 8307:) 8262:) 8248:) 8222:) 8193:) 8179:) 8159:) 8141:) 8130:. 8096:) 8070:) 8040:⌨ 8012:) 7972:) 7935:) 7906:) 7885:) 7857:) 7843:) 7821:) 7807:) 7788:) 7778:}} 7772:{{ 7768:}} 7762:{{ 7758:}} 7752:{{ 7732:) 7699:) 7685:) 7639:) 7604:) 7589:. 7552:. 7514:) 7486:) 7468:| 7464:| 7460:| 7456:| 7451:| 7447:| 7442:| 7438:| 7411:, 7399:) 7384:) 7376:. 7314:) 7284:) 7251:) 7220:) 7198:) 7173:) 7148:) 7114:) 7097:) 7085:. 6990:. 6966:. 6962:. 6958:. 6942:. 6923:FA 6921:/ 6919:GA 6829:66 6792:) 6776:, 6755:) 6713:) 6682:— 6619:) 6604:) 6579:) 6551:. 6534:) 6526:. 6507:) 6454:) 6409:) 6389:) 6375:) 6346:) 6326:) 6285:) 6277:. 6251:) 6213:) 6199:) 6162:) 6143:) 6128:) 6113:) 6097:) 6070:) 6062:-- 6027:. 5981:) 5946:) 5922:. 5918:, 5901:}} 5895:{{ 5882:, 5860:) 5830:) 5819:}} 5813:{{ 5798:) 5722:) 5701:. 5682:) 5643:. 5623:) 5608:) 5594:) 5562:. 5508:) 5504:• 5479:) 5458:) 5443:) 5413:) 5380:}} 5374:{{ 5368:}} 5362:{{ 5356:}} 5350:{{ 5339:) 5327:, 5272:) 5216:) 5198:) 5136:) 5084:: 5074:) 5059:) 5045:) 5030:) 5019:-- 4979:FL 4977:, 4969:, 4967:GA 4965:, 4961:, 4959:FA 4951:}} 4947:{{ 4931:. 4917:{{ 4894:) 4876:) 4857:) 4819:) 4747:) 4682:) 4665:) 4610:) 4595:) 4580:) 4564:) 4544:) 4513:) 4463:. 4412:) 4397:) 4382:) 4361:, 4351:) 4336:) 4322:) 4314:) 4303:) 4289:) 4271:) 4255:) 4230:) 4226:• 4173:) 4143:) 4110:) 4096:) 4082:) 4067:) 4052:) 4034:) 4020:) 4005:) 3985:) 3966:) 3944:) 3913:) 3832:) 3808:) 3781:) 3771:— 3724:) 3679:- 3675:, 3672:- 3653:) 3622:! 3606:Z- 3590:. 3535:) 3499:) 3482:) 3467:) 3459:. 3448:) 3412:. 3356:) 3342:) 3327:) 3283:. 3244:) 3229:) 3197:) 3159:) 3137:) 3118:) 3056:, 3052:, 2977:50 2975:. 2957:33 2955:. 2951:. 2929:21 2927:. 2915:) 2891:) 2877:) 2873:• 2841:) 2786:A 2765:) 2738:) 2692:) 2677:) 2663:) 2655:. 2641:) 2619:) 2598:) 2583:) 2560:) 2538:) 2530:-- 2523:) 2493:) 2461:) 2441:Or 2425:}} 2419:{{ 2415:}} 2409:{{ 2381:) 2351:) 2343:. 2329:}} 2323:{{ 2319:}} 2313:{{ 2290:) 2259:) 2244:) 2170:) 2140:) 2122:) 2093:) 2079:) 2054:) 2039:) 2005:) 1997:-- 1989:) 1961:) 1940:) 1921:) 1884:) 1867:) 1843:) 1826:) 1805:) 1780:) 1770:if 1751:) 1730:) 1708:) 1691:, 1683:, 1675:, 1667:, 1659:, 1642:) 1628:) 1613:) 1570:) 1555:) 1477:) 1462:) 1421:) 1389:, 1381:, 1373:, 1365:, 1357:, 1349:, 1341:, 1308:) 1286:) 1272:}} 1266:{{ 1262:}} 1256:{{ 1223:) 1199:) 1177:) 1143:) 1121:) 1103:) 1081:) 1051:) 1027:, 1019:, 1011:, 999:? 977:) 962:c. 917:) 896:) 881:) 873:-- 851:) 829:) 794:) 756:) 734:) 710:, 702:, 694:, 679:) 646:) 627:) 612:) 574:) 555:) 521:) 498:) 482:) 459:) 446:. 410:) 394:) 363:) 331:) 268:Z- 252:. 228:) 220:. 161:) 146:) 111:) 10320:( 10289:( 10274:( 10244:/ 10222:( 10194:( 10165:( 10100:( 10062:( 10038:( 10020:: 10016:@ 10004:( 9971:( 9842:( 9794:( 9769:( 9713:( 9668:( 9653:( 9641:: 9616:: 9602:o 9571:: 9566:. 9549:a 9530:( 9514:( 9464:? 9446:( 9423:( 9371:( 9339:( 9319:( 9313:: 9309:@ 9296:( 9271:( 9207:( 9189:( 9171:( 9129:( 9096:( 9080:( 9057:( 9027:( 9005:: 9001:@ 8997:: 8993:@ 8982:( 8960:( 8950:: 8946:@ 8934:( 8914:( 8870:· 8865:( 8856:· 8851:( 8842:· 8837:( 8801:( 8765:( 8743:( 8725:( 8704:| 8681:) 8673:( 8654:( 8638:/ 8626:, 8603:( 8558:( 8552:: 8548:@ 8537:( 8519:( 8513:: 8509:@ 8498:( 8457:: 8453:@ 8441:( 8388:( 8350:§ 8326:· 8321:( 8303:( 8291:§ 8258:( 8244:( 8218:( 8189:( 8175:( 8155:( 8137:( 8092:( 8066:( 8038:| 8024:( 8008:( 7968:( 7931:( 7902:( 7881:( 7853:( 7839:( 7817:( 7803:( 7784:( 7728:( 7695:( 7681:( 7651:: 7647:@ 7635:( 7600:( 7510:( 7482:( 7472:) 7434:( 7417:: 7413:@ 7395:( 7380:( 7338:: 7334:@ 7330:: 7326:@ 7310:( 7280:( 7274:: 7270:@ 7247:( 7241:: 7237:@ 7216:( 7209:: 7205:@ 7194:( 7187:: 7183:@ 7169:( 7159:: 7155:@ 7144:( 7110:( 7093:( 7045:§ 6976:. 6970:: 6964:4 6788:( 6751:( 6709:( 6615:( 6600:( 6575:( 6530:( 6503:( 6450:( 6405:( 6385:( 6371:( 6342:( 6322:( 6281:( 6263:: 6259:@ 6247:( 6209:( 6195:( 6158:( 6139:( 6124:( 6109:( 6093:( 6066:( 6031:♠ 6021:: 6017:@ 6008:§ 5977:( 5942:( 5928:♠ 5856:( 5848:( 5826:( 5794:( 5718:( 5707:: 5703:@ 5678:( 5647:♠ 5619:( 5604:( 5590:( 5566:♠ 5540:( 5500:( 5475:( 5454:( 5439:( 5409:( 5391:♠ 5335:( 5301:♠ 5290:§ 5268:( 5241:♠ 5212:( 5194:( 5170:: 5166:@ 5146:♠ 5132:( 5107:| 5089:| 5070:( 5055:( 5041:( 5026:( 4998:| 4971:B 4963:A 4935:♠ 4923:( 4890:( 4872:( 4853:( 4815:( 4797:♠ 4779:: 4775:@ 4767:§ 4743:( 4721:: 4717:@ 4714:: 4710:@ 4707:: 4703:@ 4700:: 4696:@ 4678:( 4661:( 4648:♠ 4606:( 4591:( 4576:( 4560:( 4540:( 4509:( 4486:} 4408:( 4393:( 4378:( 4347:( 4332:( 4318:( 4299:( 4285:( 4267:( 4251:( 4222:( 4192:♠ 4169:( 4139:( 4106:( 4092:( 4078:( 4063:( 4048:( 4030:( 4016:( 4001:( 3981:( 3962:( 3940:( 3909:( 3828:( 3815:@ 3804:( 3777:( 3720:( 3702:S 3696:† 3687:O 3649:( 3626:♠ 3570:) 3564:( 3531:( 3495:( 3478:( 3463:( 3444:( 3423:e 3419:e 3415:J 3368:♠ 3352:( 3338:( 3323:( 3317:: 3313:@ 3310:: 3306:@ 3303:: 3299:@ 3295:. 3291:: 3254:♠ 3240:( 3225:( 3193:( 3175:: 3171:@ 3155:( 3133:( 3114:( 3071:e 3067:e 3063:J 3022:. 3004:. 2986:. 2966:. 2939:. 2935:: 2911:( 2887:( 2869:( 2837:( 2761:( 2734:( 2688:( 2673:( 2659:( 2637:( 2630:: 2626:@ 2615:( 2609:: 2605:@ 2594:( 2579:( 2556:( 2549:: 2545:@ 2534:( 2519:( 2504:: 2500:@ 2489:( 2457:( 2392:: 2388:@ 2377:( 2362:: 2358:@ 2347:( 2301:: 2297:@ 2286:( 2271:: 2267:@ 2255:( 2240:( 2166:( 2160:: 2156:@ 2151:: 2147:@ 2136:( 2118:( 2106:: 2102:@ 2089:( 2075:( 2065:: 2061:@ 2050:( 2035:( 2024:: 2020:@ 2016:: 2012:@ 2001:( 1985:( 1957:( 1951:: 1947:@ 1936:( 1917:( 1880:( 1863:( 1856:: 1852:@ 1839:( 1822:( 1816:: 1812:@ 1801:( 1791:: 1787:@ 1776:( 1762:: 1758:@ 1747:( 1726:( 1719:: 1715:@ 1704:( 1697:: 1693:@ 1689:: 1685:@ 1681:: 1677:@ 1673:: 1669:@ 1665:: 1661:@ 1657:: 1653:@ 1638:( 1624:( 1609:( 1566:( 1551:( 1488:: 1484:@ 1473:( 1458:( 1417:( 1411:: 1407:@ 1403:: 1399:@ 1395:: 1391:@ 1387:: 1383:@ 1379:: 1375:@ 1371:: 1367:@ 1363:: 1359:@ 1355:: 1351:@ 1347:: 1343:@ 1339:: 1335:@ 1319:: 1315:@ 1304:( 1282:( 1247:: 1243:@ 1234:: 1230:@ 1219:( 1195:( 1188:: 1184:@ 1173:( 1166:: 1162:@ 1139:( 1132:: 1128:@ 1117:( 1099:( 1089:: 1085:@ 1077:( 1047:( 1041:: 1037:@ 1033:: 1029:@ 1025:: 1021:@ 1017:: 1013:@ 1009:: 1005:@ 988:: 984:@ 973:( 913:( 907:: 903:@ 892:( 877:( 862:: 858:@ 847:( 825:( 806:: 802:@ 790:( 752:( 730:( 724:: 720:@ 716:: 712:@ 708:: 704:@ 700:: 696:@ 692:: 688:@ 675:( 661:: 657:@ 642:( 623:( 608:( 593:: 589:@ 585:: 581:@ 570:( 551:( 517:( 494:( 478:( 455:( 406:( 390:( 378:( 359:( 327:( 224:( 157:( 142:( 123:: 119:@ 107:( 101:: 97:@ 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.