Talk:Northern cricket frog

Latest comment: 1 year ago by 72.8.248.245 in topic Possible false info

Wiki Education assignment: Behavioral Ecology 2022

edit

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Froggo1324 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Thebullfrogwhisperer, Darreciel, Friedaloo.

— Assignment last updated by Eurquhart02 (talk) 23:27, 10 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Peer review comments

edit

{{I found it is interesting how they were named to be cricket frogs. Most of the readers will not read too far and usually focus more on the introduction, so it is better to make the introduction a little longer. And for the two recognized subspecies mentioned in the introduction, maybe it’s better to briefly name that species specifically. Therefore summarization of some other sections is recommended to be included in the introduction and I did that already. And for the habitat and distribution section, since it mentions that some other factors such as proximity to water, shelter accessibility, and temperature can affect influence their utilization of microhabitats, maybe it’s better to talk more about how these factors affect their choice. Do they prefer higher temperatures or lower temperatures? Etc. The same advice can be given in the conservation section as well. Only one brief summarization is included in that section, then how do these frogs can act as indicators of the health of wetlands and environmental quality specifically based on their choice of area of inhabit? We know it’s important, but how? In the variation in the male calling section, again, how does calling change during aggressive encounters? One phrase summarization will be enough. And it seems that the morphology and the description section have some overlapping contexts and morphology does not need to be a separate section alone. I changed some sentences’ wordings. Darreciel (talk) 05:43, 17 November 2022 (UTC)}}Reply

Peer Review

edit

{{I really liked this article. It made a lot of sense, was very thorough, and had good headings and subheadings. I had some tiny edits based on italicizing the subspecies and adding sources for the page. I thought about changing the title of one of the headings to Taxonomy rather than Speciation to be more direct. However, it would be up to the author as to whether or not to change this. It might also be worth considering going into more detail about the sex determination piece of the article to better inform the public on how endocrine disruptors impact such a widely distributed frog. Great work nonetheless Thebullfrogwhisperer (talk) 05:35, 18 November 2022 (UTC)}}Reply

A Peer review

edit

This article seems to be well written and has some interesting. There are some redundancies that I have deleted as the same information is written in the description as there is in the speciation section. Also I think there should be a citation for the information in conservation. There should be a section specific only for reproduction and life cycle as well as parental care. I feel like parts of the information are spread across the article. Otherwise, there is not much to be added or changed. Perhaps maybe a section for human interaction as I imagine that there must be some form of interactions between the two. Friedaloo (talk) 01:43, 17 November 2022 (UTC)}}Reply

Possible false info

edit

Looking through the sources I can't find anything to back up the claim in the description that they are among the three smallest vertebrates in the US. Does anyone have a source for this older than it's addition to the article? 72.8.248.245 (talk) 20:50, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply