Talk:Lulworth skipper

Lulworth skipper 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 5, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Dorset Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dorset, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics connected with Dorset. If you would like to participate, you can visit the WikiProject Dorset project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.DorsetWikipedia:WikiProject DorsetTemplate:WikiProject DorsetDorset articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

Lepidoptera Low‑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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Importance rating[edit]

This is a UK Biodiversity Action Plan (2007) species—GRM 15:18, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Upgrading / clarifications[edit]

"Due to their likeness to the rays around the eye of a peacock's feather, these are often known as 'sun-ray' markings, and they can faintly appear on males." — what have "peacock's eye feathers" got to do with "sun rays"?

I'm not sure, but it's referred to in two of the books I have on Lulworth Skipper's.

Need to mention this is a UK BAP species
What about physical description of caterpillar, pupa and egg?

Can you source any additional images to liven up the entry?

I could try, but it's been an awful summer here in Dorset. I haven't had any oppurtunity to actually photograph any!

Cross-reference detailed taxonomy on Wikispecies?

What do you mean by cross-reference? I'll take a look at its taxonomy there, I quite forgot WikiSpecies existed to be honest.

What is the system used for vulnerability/conservations status? (Add to taxobox)

Quite honestly, I'm not sure. I'll find out.

- I am not sure this is ready for an upgrade to "B" class just yet. Maybe ask on Leps project page for further peer review...?

—GRM (talk) 19:19, 3 August 2009 (UTC) —GRM (talk) 19:29, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I shall do that once I've made these and more changes. Thanks again. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 20:33, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:07, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am reading through now and am making straightforward changes as I go. Please revert any where I inadvertently change the meaning. Queries below. Also, don't automatically do what I suggest - if you think otherwise please say so and we can discuss. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:07, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With a wingspan of 24–28 millimetres, females being larger than males, the Lulworth Skipper is considered a small butterfly; it is the smallest member of the Thymelicus genus in Europe and is among the smallest butterflies in Britain.... - this paragraph is a little repetitive - I'd lose the the Lulworth Skipper is considered a small butterfly segment and connect the first bit to the description somehow.

Reworded, hope that's better. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 22:01, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the Taxonomy section, anything about closest relatives or subspecies etc.?

I can certainly add something, just give me a day or two. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 22:01, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about delay - do you have any objection to moving the article to its scientific name? more to come. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:59, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem. Not particularly, although I would prefer it to stay as it is, if only because the other Skippers all follow the general name. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 17:55, 26 January 2010 (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:

- okay, I will assume good faith that there is not really much out there accessible. This does happen alot once one moves away from warm-blooded vertebrates :)

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:

Images need WP:ALT text.

Added. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 17:30, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overall:

Pass or Fail:

We're almost there - the only things I'd add if possible are some more on taxonomy/related species, the meaning of the specific name (after Actaeon?), and if there is any info on parasites, predators etc. i.e. what birds eat it, any wasps etc. which parasitize it. If none can be found then that's ok. Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:31, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've just looked through all of my sources and some online, and can't find any information on the areas you mention. Sorry. I'll try and get hold of some other sources another time, but I can't promise anything soon. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 18:34, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Update - for GA status, I'll now presume what we have is what we have and represents decent summary of what we have on the little critter. GA passed. Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:31, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]