Talk:Muscina

Muscina received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

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 articles
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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on early 2009. Further details are available here.

Merge needed

The section Muscina#Myiasis of this article is the same subject as the article Myiasis. Those parts should be merge. As it is, there are two separate articles where the subject of Myiasis is discussed at length. —Mattisse (Talk) 21:34, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  - That's a very good idea!  I'm not sure how to merge the material, but I will just copy and paste the Myiasis section of my
    article with the main Myiasis page.  I have to keep all the information in my article, as this article is a school
    project and simply linking to the Myiasis main page for information probably won't get me an A.
    --Hieu87 (talk) 21:42, 31 March 2009 (UTC)Hieu87[reply]

Peer Review

article should be renamed to Muscina
remove period from taxobox caption (sentence fragments don't need ending punctuation)
genus name in infobox should be italicized
avoid repetitive wording in species list by using shorthand M. instead of spelling out the genus name every time; put the species list in alphabetical order
Is there a type species and authority that could also be put in the taxobox?
"The Muscina genus currently consists of 27 species including Muscina stabulans, Muscina dorsilinea, Muscina flukei, Muscina fulvacrura, Muscina levida, Muscina pascuorum, Muscina prolapsa, and many more. This number is subject to change as new discoveries and data are found.[1] Muscina sp. can be found worldwide.[3]" suggest rewording all this to this: "The Muscina genus, consisting of 27 species, has a worldwide distribution." Reason: no need to give a partial list of species, when a complete list in shown in the taxobox. Also. the fact that the number of species will change is the same for any genus of any organism, so it doesn't need to be stated here. Of course, this change makes the lead too short, so you'll have to fatten it up with choice tidbits from the article.
"...and have moderately curved fourth veins with the lather also having a black palpi." what's the significance of a fourth vein? lather->latter?
"These flies average 8mm. in length." There should be a non-breaking space after a measurement before the unit; mm shouldn't have a period after it.
"Circular spiracular plates could be found..." Need to explain what what this is.
Wikilink synanthropy
"...and are rarely found in cities (Neotrop. Ento. 2004).[8]" There's already an in-line cite, so the Harvard-type cit in parentheses should be removed).
Re: "Life Cycle" section header (and others below)- only the first word of section headers should be capitalized (unless there's a name involved).
Muscina isn't consistently italicized throughout the article; Many instances of Muscina could be shortened to M.; in general use the full name in the first occurrence in a new section, then the short form after that.
"Moreover, a study conducted in New Haven, Connecticut using certain species of flies..." The study location isn't relevant and should be removed. Same thing later. Those who really want to know can look at the citation.
"...fly incidence peaked about 4-5 months" use an endash for number ranges (other instances throughout articles need fixing too).
In the Intestinal myiasis section, too mush detail is given on the experimental details (eg. "By attaching a camera to a MOTIC BA 300 digital compound microscope, pictures were taken...) Just summarize the importance results.
"The larvae were confirmed by Dr. M. T. James of the College of the Washington and Drs. C. W. Sabrosky..." Honorific titles like Dr. aren't used in Wiki articles for cases like this.
"...also appeared in samples collected at 200 m altitude and above." use the convert template to conveniently give both metric and imperial units.
Remove the conclusion section completely, and integrate that information into the lead.
Italicize names in external links section.
The article could use a copyedit to tighten up the prose; make the changes suggested above and give me a ping if you'd like me to do that for you. Sasata (talk) 20:32, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
Just noticed that this article is part of a class project, so me doing a copyedit might not be fair game... confirm that's it's ok with your professor if a copyedit is desired. Sasata (talk) 02:29, 25 March 2009 (UTC)--Sasata (talk) 21:39, 31 March 2009 (UTC)Sasata[reply]

   -Thanks for your review.  I've fix many of the problems that you mentioned.
      --Hieu87 (talk) 21:55, 31 March 2009 (UTC)Hieu87[reply]

So as I was reading your page, I noticed that the section entitled "medical importance" was very choppy and had room to be cleared up. Maybe think about combining a few sentences so that there is a better flow to the page instead of just a constant reoccurrence of periods and endings of sentences. I really enjoyed the information in your article and was impressed with the amount of information you were able to find on the subject. The last comment that I felt I could make was about your "species" box. I felt that it was good to have a list of the species in this family, but I felt that having it in the side box and it going almost the length of the page was somewhat distracting. Possibly move the species into the bulk of the paper or maybe see if you can clean it up and make it more concise so that it does not distract from the rest of the page. Good job!Nav52 (talk) 14:53, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

suggestions

Wow, your page is fantastic. It is easy to tell you spent a great deal of time on it. The only suggestion I can think to make is breaking up your long paragraphs with bullets, or starred points or incorporating pictures into the text. Most people gloss over a page to see if the point of information they are looking for is on the page.Catielynn.russell (talk) 00:57, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey guys, your page looks great. I can tell you put a lot of work into the research, your page is very informative. I really liked you section on myiasis, the individual cases were a nice touch. A few thing about it though, for Cutaneous myiasis you may want to put what exactly that kind of myiasis that is because it was a little confusing. Also you may want to think about rearranging the paragraphs so myiasis is with medical importance because it seems like the two are closely related. Otherwise the page looks really good, Great job guys.Smurph7282 (talk) 17:22, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Nav52, Catielynn.russell and Smurph7282 for your suggestions! Nav52, we've edited the sentences in the medical importance section and it should flow more smoothly.

To answer your comments, Catielyn.russell, i would like to first off say that you have some pretty good points. but, while we understand that putting bullet points will definitely help summarize the information in our paragraph, it is also quite a monumental task and seeing that our project is due in 24 hours, I'm afraid we won't be able to fix this problem at this point in time. I'm not really sure what you mean when you say to incorporate pictures into the text. We have several pictures scattered throughout our article.

Okay now to answer your comments Smurph7828. First off, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say about the myiasis, b/c cutaneous myiasis is myiasis of the skin (cutaneous). I can't really get anymore specific than that. We broke up the myiasis section into cutaneous, intestinal, and sheep. The reason we didn't put Myiasis with Medical Importance was because we found a lot of good information on the Myiasis topic alone and felt it wouldn't do it justice to put it under the medical section.

Thanks to all who contributed to this article. Charms18 (talk) 22:45, 15 April 2009 (UTC) Charms18 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Charms18 (talk • contribs) 22:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Muscina. 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:

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) 22:33, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]