Talk:Charaxes ocellatus
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Technical Descriptions
[edit]I wasn't sure what to do about the very messy "technical description" section, especially the fact that there two subsections for hindwing. For now, I just removed the redundant hingwing section and made a few other edits to make it more readable. If I have the time I might rewrite the whole section, if I can find some sources that are not in German. Any help or tips would be appreciated! Ccarpenoctem (talk) 00:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
General description of wings Suggestion
[edit]The "General description of wings" is ununderstanable and confusing, Here is my suggestion to replace it with this:
General description of wings: The wings of the butterfly are chestnut-tawny, with the forewing being darker than the hindwing. The outer region of the forewing and postdisco-submarginal patches of the hindwing are black. The forewing is falcate and crossed by an oblique discal band of pure white patches. The band does not reach SM2 and is widest at the front. The band is bordered proximally by median bars R2-SM2 and bar D, with median bars SC2-R2 within the band. Bars R1-M2 are arched, and patch M2-SM2 is much smaller than the one before it. One or two whitish or pinkish buff postdiscal spots can be found between SC4 and R1, about halfway between the band and apex. The second spot is mostly absent, and sometimes both are difficult to see. The internervular folds have buffish longitudinal lines at the margin, and the fringe is white except at veins.
I am not sure if this is factual or true, As I have used sources that are not accessible via internet. So if you found this factual and correct then add replace this section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thecybergulf (talk • contribs) 17:05, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with your changes above. I'm working on copyediting the whole article, so I can replace the current section with the section you wrote. What sources did you use that are not accessible via internet? It seems to me that the info is the same, just written in a much clearer way. Ecoevergreen (talk) 01:10, 16 October 2023 (UTC)