Wikipedia:Peer review/Phormia regina/archive1

Phormia regina

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like other people to read and catch any gramatical errors and mistakes. I also think that the writing could use some touch ups here and there. I would also like to know if I have references correctly listed and if I need to link more pages.

Thanks, Kt babe8 (talk) 16:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)kt_babe8[reply]

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

I'm no subject matter expert but allow me to comment on style and method.

I believe we usually italicise Latin names of fauna.
" blow fly family Calliphoridae. Although some authorities merge both the blow fly group (Calliphoridae) and the flesh fly group (Sarcophagidae) together in the family Metopiidae, key distinguishable physical traits allow for this separation" is repeated verbatim in the taxonomy section. Reword, and expand here.
For repeated citations which point to the identical reference, use the ref name= code. If you need help with this, let me know.
"(78% [dung] versus 100% [beef liver])." write out as prose.
Need more links in the lifecycle section, as it stands it's a rather bland set of paragraphs which are unappealing to the non-expert (i.e. me!)
For ranges (e.g. temperature ranges, page ranges) separate the numbers using an en-dash (–) rather than a hyphen (-) - read more about this at WP:DASH.
"12:12 (Light:Dark) " expand this for non-experts.
There's a [clarify] note in the physiology section so that needs to be dealt with.
"post mortem interval or PMI" and then "post mortem interval (PMI) " in the next para. Just one will suffice, the first one.
"Kirckpatrick " typo.
Medicinal importance section needs referencing.
As does Discovery. Some of the discovery stuff should go in the lead as well.
For links to the internet, use the {{cite web}} template.

Hope some of this helps. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is always useful to have a model article to work on and follow as a guide for organization and ideas on how to discuss the topic. Chrysiridia rhipheus is a recent Good Article and seems like a decent model for this one. Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:21, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]