Talk:Common mist frog

	Common mist frog is part of WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, an effort to make Wikipedia a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource for amphibians and reptiles. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Amphibians and ReptilesWikipedia:WikiProject Amphibians and ReptilesTemplate:WikiProject Amphibians and Reptilesamphibian and reptile articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia: Queensland / Biota Low‑importance

	Australia portal Common mist frog is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Queensland (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Queensland.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Wiki Education assignment: Behavioral Ecology 2022

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Sophieeichler (article contribs). Peer reviewers: AnnieLiu13, Froggo1324, Reni.Akande, NineAilrulus.

— Assignment last updated by CalJS (talk) 23:57, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Characteristics and Conservation Status changes

I thought it would be a good idea to separate the "Characteristics" section into two different subsections to lessen the feeling of facing a wall of text. Froggo1324 (talk) 04:08, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was unable to find the source corresponding to the line "This disease can ultimately cause cardiac arrest once the fungal population on the host organism reaches a high enough density." in the Conservation Status section of the article. I checked source [7], the closest citation near this line, but could not find anything about cardiac arrest and the threshold of the fungal population within the source. Froggo1324 (talk) 19:57, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Grammatical, Reference, and Image Edits - Peer Review

I made a couple overall grammatical edits throughout the paper (spacing, capitalization, word order) that I believe made the entire article flow, and look cohesive. I specifically went to through and made many words (mistfrog, etc.) that were inconsistently spelled/spaced consistent. I changed the citation for reference [6] because it was very difficult for me to find and therefore properly fat check; I found the doi for that source and edited it to help with this missing piece. I included the map of the Wet Tropics of Queensland from its Wikipedia page, and I also linked its Wikipedia page where the wet tropics were first mentioned in "Habitat and Distribution". I also linked the Wikipedia page for Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis in the "Conservation" section. Lastly, I deleted the last line in the "Recovery Plan" section because it was very random and did not add anymore information to the section that would have been of significance. Reni.Akande (talk) 17:23, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

I made some edits with grammar, spelling, and sentence phrasing. I also changed the prior header about conservation status to endangerment, which I believe better captures what that section was trying to convey. I also moved a line about amplexus down to the mating section, because I believe it made more sense there. For the part of the article talking about how tadpoles have suctorial mouthparts to survive in fast-flowing water, I wasn't able to access the source you cited (a book) but if you could elaborate what they suction on to, that could be helpful. In the section on Ecology and Behavior, I believe more elaboration on breeding-site fidelity could be helpful; how is fidelity observed and assessed? Are you implying that females are not faithful to any single site? I am also unsure which source you pulled this information from. For behavior as well, did you find any sources looking into what the frogs did outside of breeding? Are they typically social or independent creatures? Finally, for the mating section, what kind of parental care does the frog exhibit? Initial searches on the internet did not yield any sources, but if you come across anything that could be a useful addition. AnnieLiu13 (talk) 05:01, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]