Talk:List of butterflies of the Western Ghats

India Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lepidoptera Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lepidoptera, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of butterflies and moths on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LepidopteraWikipedia:WikiProject LepidopteraTemplate:WikiProject LepidopteraLepidoptera
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Copyvio

There was a note on the article creator's talk page suggesting that this was a copyvio. This would however not be a copyright violation since this is a list of species of a specific region. The source is being cited and it is information being used not any creativity. The order unfortunately is something decide by classification and not a matter of creativity. Shyamal 16:01, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What Next?

I have finished creating the Stubs for the species in Western Ghats List. What more needs to be done here to compleat the article ? Vijay Barve 11:52, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On the list itself, perhaps it would help to indicate all endemics and those with restricted ranges (Nilgiris only, restricted by the Goa/Palghat gap). The stub articles themselves would of course need to progress with images, descriptions, host plants and distribution maps apart from behavioural and ecological notes and references. The list should also be adorned with representative thumbnail illustrations along the side to go along with the groups. So when someone with a butterfly in mind runs through the page, they should be approximately be able to place their species. Shyamal 13:38, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not verified?

Why do we have a not verified tag on this article. The sources are named. The source authors are rock solid scientists. The list does not pers refs (i think). I propose to remove the tag. Please let me know if there is any specific objection which needs to be settled. Regards, AshLin 03:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed it. But I think it may be useful to cite references for all new additions. For instance [1] Cephrenes palmarum is perhaps published recently (in JBNHS) ? Any ref available ? Shyamal 03:37, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The vetting of info from Journals is a collossal task. I guess it has to wait for the more imprtant things such as putting up lists, stubs, images & info first. AshLin 12:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]