 | Bicyclus anynana was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (November 13, 2013). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
This article was the subject of an educational assignment in Fall 2013. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Washington University in St. Louis/Behavioral Ecology (Fall 2013)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.
edit
Additions edit
I added a new sub-section underneath the Mating section entitled Male Courtship Rate Plasticity. I included information that the author previously had in the article, but the majority of it was my own. In addition to adding the following information, I edited the article by breaking down a couple of the longer, hard-to-read paragraphs so that it would flow better. I found that some of the sentences were choppy and combined a couple of those. NK2015 (talk) 16:30, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Edit edit
I am a student in a Behavioral Ecology Class at Washington University in St. Louis. I just made a few minor adjustments to this article. I edited the grammar of Mating section, adding in some explanations or clarifications to make the article clearer. In addition, I reordered some of the sentences of the Male Courtship Rate Plasticity Subsection to make the information easier to comprehend. In general, most of my corrections for this article were grammatical or format-related. Kzyoung (talk • contribs) 18:19, 10 October 2013
The opening section is very detailed and concise. In the "Research" section, I made changes to grammatical errors and moved the second paragraph to the "Male courtship rate plasticity" section. The "Taxonomy" section needs a citation and should probably be put in the opening section. The “Lifecycle” section is good with the pictures, but it would be helpful to see some literature as well. I fixed grammatical errors in the “Habitat and feeding” section. In the “Elder male preference” section, I fixed grammatical erros and moved the second paragraph to "Eyespots", a section that I added. The "Defense and Predation" and first paragraph of "Phenotypic Plasticity" were added to this section as well. I moved the second paragraph of "Phenotypic Plasticity" to "Mating". Morganclem (talk • contribs) 22:13, 10 October 2013
Great addition about the behavior of this species! Overall, I thought the article was very well written. I added wikilinks throughout the “habitat and feeding”, “mating” and “eyespots” sections. I also substituted the scientific name (Bicyclus anynana) with the common name (Squinting Bush Brown) throughout the article ( I only left it on the introduction and taxonomy sections). This is one of the requirements to bring the article to “good article” status. --Aliciacanas (talk) 04:23, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Overall your contributions to this article are nicely done. Your sections on Behavior are well written and informative. Your citations are also well done. I also think that the Description, Research, and Taxonomy sections are nice additions for moving towards good article. I think that the life cycle section should be deleted since it does not add anything to your article overall. Moreover, I think that the intro section needs more details summarizing your article as a whole. I was given this link upon good article review: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section. Although it is lengthy, it gives great advice on how to get your intro section to good article. Morganclem (talk) 02:48, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
GA Review edit
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Bicyclus anynana/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 20:43, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- Maintenance banner, missing citations, not ready for GA. FunkMonk (talk) 20:43, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for taking time to review this article. I have expanded the lead and have followed the suggestions set forth by wikipedia. In addition to this I also added in references that were missing.Npatel92 (talk) 01:23, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
More edits edit
The most important thing I did during my edit was expanding the lead to make it conform better with Wikipedia's expectation of a good lead; namely, I added information that summarized the important information contained in the article. This makes the introduction to the article a better overview of its contents. In addition, I added a few citations to information that hadn't been cited, cleared up the wording of some confusing sentences and rearranged the formatting of the Life cycle section so the text is above the pictures. I hope the improving quality of this article will mean it gets renominated for GA soon.Solon5g93 (talk) 23:43, 5 December 2013 (UTC)