Talk:Xylophanes nabuchodonosor

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Xylophanes nabuchodonosor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20111112141332/http://www.silkmoths.bizland.com/xnabucho.htm to http://www.silkmoths.bizland.com/xnabucho.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:09, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

I think the image in the righthand box is incorrect

I've never edited a page before and would rather request that someone else makes this fix, but the point is, the moth on the right is clearly not an example of either male or female in the body of the article. I believe that moth is in fact Xylophanes virescens, found on a separate page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xylophanes_virescens and thus it should be included there and replaced here. Note the dual dorsal lines atop the thorax, the less convergent middle veins in the wings, and the deeper abdominal side stripe, compared to the body article examples. A google image search shows other examples of virescens for comparison. Correct me if I'm wrong (hence my reticence to edit myself), but if someone more experienced with making edits agrees, please make the fix! Many thanks Jared — Preceding unsigned comment added by JaredWithTheBike (talk • contribs) 03:16, 21 May 2020 (UTC)