Talk:Rhamphomyia longicauda

Insects Low‑importance

	Insects portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects 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.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Diptera Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Diptera, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of flies 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.DipteraWikipedia:WikiProject DipteraTemplate:WikiProject DipteraDiptera
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Qbugbot notice

This article was created by the bot Qbugbot. For more information, see User:Qbugbot/info. For questions and comments, leave a message at User:Qbugbot/talk.

Peer Review

Hey Emmanuel. Thanks for the research you’ve done with your article! You have a great, broad range of images, which is great for Good Article contention! I have some small comments/revisions you can make. To start, an “immediate failure” of Good Article contention is having clean-up banners. At the bottom of your article, you had some “Cite error: A list-defined reference named "itis" is not used in the content (see the help page).” For four of your references, so I went ahead and deleted those references to get rid of the banner. Additionally, you had a section called “Home range” in which you contained a subheading that had “Lek location and formation.” I went ahead and took out that “Home range” heading (because there was no text under it anyways), and made the “Lek location and formation” its own section. Lastly, I added a little more to your overview section, because you had a sentence about sex role reversal (thus, I added a detail that I found in your article about females not hunting for food). Overall, great article! andrewoh29 (talk) 17:22, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The user has done a great job in starting this new fly page. A quick scroll down the page shows the page is clear, organized, and well-formatted. The writer has added necessary hyperlinking, a properly made taxobox, and has added a pertinent image of the fly. I have edited some of the writer's initial work in order to provide better grammatical structure and to prevent misplaced modifiers from detracting from a reader's comprehension of the page. I have changed,"Males have shorter wing length, as females are found to sexually select shorter wingspans in males.", to "Shorter wings are sexually selected for in males." I have also changed, "Additionally, the ventral section region of the female retina is larger than the dorsal region, which helps them locate encroaching males that are pursuing mating.[2] A correlation between egg length and egg number was observed in females, as a greater quantity of eggs in addition to longer eggs correlated with larger pleural sacs. Males tend to select for longer wings and shorter tibiae." to "The ventral region of the female retina is larger than the dorsal region, which helps them locate encroaching males that are pursuing mating.[2] There is a positive correlation between egg length and egg number, and female pleural sacs. Males tend to select for longer wings and shorter tibiae." The writer has done an exceptional job in describing Lek formation and food resources of this fly, but the writer may want to move the information about nuptial gifts into a Behavior Category. This change is not necessary, however, because the text under Food Resources summarizes how females must rely on males for food, so there is substance in inserting this information under the "Food Resources" category. Overall, the writer has done a profound job in starting the Wiki page for this fly, and much work has been done on this page! The writer continually creates professional quality Wiki contributions, and still continues to produce work that exemplifies what proper summarizing of complex and detailed research should look like! Jillian Shah (talk) 23:09, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My main edits of this wikipedia page involved attempting to transform some of the sections from punctate, separate facts to a more cohesive, easily readable piece. The information was very thorough and relatively well organized, so this wasn't difficult to do, and mostly involved deleting spaces between sentences. My main suggestion for this page is to make explicit whether the picture in the article is a male or female fly, as they were described separately and it was not made clear as it stands now. I think it would also be useful to include a picture of both the male and female adult flies together for comparison. Overall, the sentence structure was excellent throughout the article and the salient points about the fly were highlighted. Olivia.urso (talk) 21:34, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This Wikipedia page was very interesting to read as well as very easy to follow. One of my favorite facts from this page was the fact that these organisms participate in sex-role reversal, as the females “put on exaggerated displays to congregate in leks to attract males”. Out of the few changes I made, a few of the heading names could have been more connected to the topics discussed throughout the article, so I adjusted them so that they made for a more cohesive read. The language used in this article was very accessible, so a wide range of viewers could have a relatively easy time reading it and learning new information. I think something that could be defined or more clearly explained is what a lek is, and why it is important to Rhamphomyia longicauda mating. I believe that adding in more pictures would really contribute to the page’s rank as a good article. Perhaps photos of the development of this organism, or a photo of a courting display could give readers a better sense of visualization of the points that you mention throughout your article. I also think if there could be an addition of more in-depth information regarding predation behaviors and behavioral interactions with organisms in its habitat. Overall this article was one of the more interesting ones I have read! lelandra 5 November 2019

I thought that inorder to make the article make a little more sense the Lek location and formation could’ve been a subheading underneath Lek in the Mating section, that might just be a personally preference of mine.I also made syntax changes, to make the article a little clearer. I thought that this article was one of the more interesting ones, good job! KendalTLee (talk) 03:38, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I added hyperlinks to certain words in the captions of the photos so that the captions were more complete and a little easier to understand. KendalTLee (talk) 05:04, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]