Talk:Tansy beetle

Tansy beetle has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: July 9, 2017. (Reviewed version).

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.

Beetles Mid‑importance

	Insects portal Tansy beetle is within the scope of WikiProject Beetles, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to beetles. For more information, visit the project page.BeetlesWikipedia:WikiProject BeetlesTemplate:WikiProject Beetlesbeetle
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Yorkshire Low‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Tansy beetle is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Tansy beetle appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 23 July 2017 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that in the UK, the endangered Tansy beetle can only be found on the banks of the River Ouse, near York?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2017/July. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tansy beetle.

Wikipedia

Article development

@Zakhx150: you asked me at WP:INSECTS for further comment, but let's take it to the article page now. I've invited @Geoff Oxford: to this discussion. He contributed to the article previously, and wrote some of the references currently appearing in the article. I don't know if he's currently engaged with Wikipedia in any way, but it would be great if he chimed in.

Taking articles to Good Article is not something I've been at all involved with. At the moment, there's one thing I notice missing; which subspecies occur in the UK and Scandinavia? Currently listed ranges for subspecies don't cover these areas where the species as a whole is said to occur. C. graminis graminis is probably what occurs in Scandinavia; that's where Linnaeus lived and he described it. And honestly, before I ventured to say anything about beetle subspecies, I should have been doing some investigation into the reliability of biolib.cz on this subject (I'm sure they're doing their best, but quality of taxonomic databases varies wildly across different groups of species and I know nothing about biolib.cz strengths and weaknesses). Plantdrew (talk) 04:49, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Plantdrew: I appreciate the effort so far. I'm not sure how active Geoff is on Wikipedia, so hadn't even thought of asking him directly. There has seen to be some discrepancy between the UK material I've used and the continental referenced stuff - mainly that the UK has been, generally speaking, more about conservation and action rather than taxonomy and subspecies variance. Perhaps this is just because I've found it easier to locate the material designed for general consumption. I appreciate the observations in any case, and will aim to work on really tying down these subspecies. Zakhx150 (talk) 13:07, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd taken the liberty of emailing Geoff as well; he's sent me through 4 articles to reference in here and was very accommodating. Edits coming in near future.Zakhx150 (talk) 13:04, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent news. Plantdrew (talk) 15:44, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tansy beetle/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:13, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, taking a look. Will jot queries below and make straightforward fixes as I go. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:13, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Might make more sense to describe it as a chrysomelid/leaf beetle in lead rather than the genus it belongs to (which will not be familiar to any bar entomologists)~~

As it said one then the other, I've just deleted the Genus link, it appears in the taxobox and taxonomy sections anyway.

~~The lead is UK-centric as is. The distribution as a whole should be discussed and then the UK range written.~~

Hopefully resolved. There is something of a bias in the literature about the species, because most recent anglophone research is on the York population.

~~Add where the subspecies occur.~~ my bad - but move the subspecies section (with ranges) into taxonomy where subspecies mentioned.

Done

Add how the subspecies differ (in addition to the two noted).

It's only C. graminis auraria for which I can actually find a description of the morphological differences from C. graminis graminis. Not sure if you meant the description of differences with C. herbacea, which is a different species? Included here because the literature mentions that the common one has been mistaken for the much rarer one.

You have that already - I mean how are ssp artemisiae, mediterranea etc. different?

Ah I see. Well the only key to the morphological features that is available to me is the Bieńkowski 2010 paper. I can't find keys to the other subspecies elsewhere, and they aren't mentioned in the Bieńkowski paper because it is restricted to those present in countries of the former USSR; only C. graminis graminis and C. graminis auraria actually key out there. The Beychne paper is available online but is in German. I just follow the Biolib ref and Bieńkowski's earlier, 2001, paper for the full list of 6 subspecies but they are just lists rather than keys. So I'm stumped. Zakhx150 (talk) 16:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, they must be somewhere...let me think on this...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:50, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Bechyne paper is in French and is here google translate gives the description of ssp. mediterranea as "Large size, elytres ventrus a bit in females. Head more finely punctuated than the disc of the prothorax. Prothorax without the lateral calus, finer punctuated towards the coasts than in the typical breed, more or less distinctly angular near the middle, shrunk forward and back. . Elytres has a punctuation punctuation with little roughness except for the discal part, marginal interval wide but not very distinct in all its length. Long. 10-12 mm" - needs a French speaker to check/iron this out and add. Circeus speaks French (this subspecies C. graminis mediterranea is on page 85!). Will start looking for the others. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:40, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kudos. Zakhx150 (talk) 16:35, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I believe large here means "wide" and taille (which under b) is described as "fine", i.e. "narrow) should thus translate to "waist" (your guess is as good as mine as to what he's referring to, though).
It says "Finer punctuation toward the sides" (the accent is important!).
I believe rétréci better translates as "narrowing", not "shrunk".

Attempt at an improved translation: "Thick/wide waist, elytras slightly protruding in females. Head more finely punctuated than the disc of the prothorax. Prothorax without lateral calus, more finely punctuated toward the sidess than in the typical breed, more or less distinctly angular near the middle, narrowing toward front and back. Elytra punctuation show slight roughness except for the discal part, marginal interval wide but poorly distinct over its entire length. Length 10-12 mm" (additionally/for reference, nominal subspecies is said to be 7-11mm long, have a calus, a "less transversal clypeus" whatever that means, very variable punctuation of the elytra, and a marginal interval that is indistinct only "at/toward the back"). Circéus (talk) 17:46, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this @Circeus:, much obliged. @Casliber: - this addition has been put in, I've removed the original table and included the morphological features under 'Description' with the descriptions of other subspecies so far available.

Right, now santonici - Contarini described it as a species in 1847 on page 189 of this book. The name takes precedence over the other subspecies name (schallehni REINEC) for this taxon (the other page, which isn't opening now for some reason, has notes on schallehni IIRC). Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:15, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So I've tried a ham-fisted Google Translate/Wiktionary partial translation of this. Uncertain or obviously clunky parts I've highlighted in bold and comments in italics: "Black mouth and palps, antennae slightly enlarged at the apex, and longer chest length, with the first two articles of the base of the pitch the others (still describing antennae I guess) of a dull bronze like the feet, all under the body, but glossy. Elytra irregularly pointed, black underneath, with the edge, suture and scutellum of a ramineo (no idea. Iridescent?) green. Abdomen red with four brown spots, and apex ramineo. Red wings, with base, and jaline (must be describing the wings) ribs. The wings have 8 veins, five of which are large. Found on salt banks (?) on santonico in August. (Santonico appears to be a plant, Artemisia caerulescens: http://www.kpss.si/it/il-parco/natura/le-piante-alofite/il-santonico)

Finally, christianiae is Mallet 1933. See the ref on page 214. I am having trouble finding stuff on it but thre are a couple of papers that turn up. @Circeus: might have some ideas on how to find that journal. Mr P-M Mallet might deserve a stub too.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:25, 30 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In continental Europe, C. graminis spp. is widespread from Scandinavia to the Mediterranean Sea. - why the "spp." here?

Removed.

~~rather than write "phytophagous" why not just write "leaf/plant-eating"?~~

Opted for Herbivorous instead

@Casliber: Thanks for taking on the review [Rolls up sleeves]. Edits ahoy! Zakhx150 (talk) 12:08, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That would be Miscellanea Entomologica. The BHL run stops at volume 24. I had a quick look at Gallica (French national library digitization project), but no luck. You're on your own there. Circéus (talk) 03:26, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong ref, sorry. Full name is (jesus christs you nonbotanists BADLY need to standardize your periodical abbreviations!) Bulletin de l’Association des Naturalistes de la Vallée du Loing or something like that (the exact form varies a little and often includes references to Fontainebleau). It seems pretty obscure, but at least wit the longer name you,re better armed to locate it on- or offline. Circéus (talk) 03:31, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, I had already spotted the full journal name and utterly failed to find it, even via the Open University's rather lovely journal access that I'm currently available to access. The journal and society are still going but that seems little help.Zakhx150 (talk) 20:10, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Casliber:@Circeus: I'm drawing a blank here. Without this info where does this get the GA nom? Zakhx150 (talk) 18:48, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, look I'll take it on board that information on the other is inaccessible and probably if/when we do find it will be meagre at best. Hang on....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:52, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

NB: Earwigs copyvio check clear Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:58, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:

Manual of Style compliance:

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:

Citations to reliable sources, where required:

No original research:

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:

Focused:

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

Overall:

Pass or Fail:

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:58, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Tansy beetle. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20111123173244/http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/conservation/biodiversity/iyb/Tansybeetle.aspx to http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/ourwork/conservation/biodiversity/iyb/Tansybeetle.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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) 13:11, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Entry evaluation

This entry provides information about the Tansy Beetle’s taxonomy, appearance, distribution and habitat, life cycle, behavior, and relationship with humans. A strength of this entry is not only does it cover many sections, but it also does it thoroughly. For example, the life cycle section provides detailed information about mating behavior and includes several pictures showing what a larva looks like, where they lay eggs, and how they mate. One interesting fact I learned is that they are called Tansy beetles because they lay their yellow eggs on tansy leaves.

In the behavior section, this entry covers the beetle’s diet, predation threats from birds, spiders, and scorpionflies, and briefly on parasites affecting it. In the life cycle section, it also covers its behavior when mating and laying eggs. Another behavioral category that can be discussed is adult social behaviors, such as how adult beetles care for the larvae, actions it takes to protect them from predators, and any grouping behavior. Furthermore, the parasite section is very brief and can be expanded on to explain how these parasites harm the beetles. This section can also include other enemies of these beetles, such as diseases that can affect them. Since these beetles are green and their habitat is on green leaves, another behavior that can be discussed is the protective coloration from their ability to blend in with their habitat, making them harder to see by birds and other predators.

In the talk section, I noticed that this entry scored a good article grade. I agree with this grade as this article provides a plethora of media to help readers visualize the content, provides a strong amount of references (46), and covers many topics while being thorough. I also noticed that this entry’s talk page contained a GA review section where wiki users can offer suggestions and feedback to strengthen the quality of this entry. This beetle was also rated as mid-importance in the beetles community which reflects the last section of this entry discussing the nationally rare designation given to this beetle in the UK and their significant conservation effort to preserve this species. Justinxuje (talk) 01:39, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mating Behavior

The article briefly mentions mating behavior, but it would be interesting to separate this into another section and expand on it since behaviors differ between populations in York and Russia. Providing more information on mating in York and rituals in Russia would be beneficial to compare them and understand how and why these differences arise. Cvj.005 (talk) 03:48, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]