Talk:Tokunagayusurika akamusi

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.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 4 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Alicelixuan.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Hi, I am Alice. I created this page for a class project and have learned a lot about the species myself. Because this species of midge fly is exclusive to Japan, a lot of sources are from Japanese scholars and academic/other public platforms. I hope having created this page will help facilitate the sharing of knowledge on this species and more excitingly, further research across barriers/boundaries of language or distance, should there be any. Cheers! Alicelixuan (talk) 17:54, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Peer reviews

Hi Alice, I am editing this for our final Wikipedia project. I made a few edits, such as making long sentences shorter and changing the grammar on a lot of sentences in each section. I changed the spacing between sections. I have three recommendations. The first is that the Taxonomy section could be rearranged to be more clear and concise. The second is that in the Life History section you said there are four stages and then only listed three. Finally, I recommend putting more citations in the Genomes section.Hannahwhite97 (talk) 22:05, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Alice, awesome article! I will be going through your article and making sentence/section level revisions to improve the overall flow of your article. The exact changes I make will be accessible via the “View History” button on your page. In general since you have a lot of good information I just focused on making things flow better rather than a whole lot of rearranging. I also went through and italicized every time a species was mentioned. I also moved a description of how the antennae help males find females to the mating section of the article.

My other thought was that according to GA guidelines, everything that is in the lead section should in one way or another be in the body of the article itself (paraphrased, if it would otherwise sound redundant). I would simply cite in the body of the article and then draw from the article itself, using the lead section to capture the main points of what the article says thus far. I tried adding first name when referring to the person that discovered the fly in the lead section, because when I tried to link to a wikipedia page on Tokunaga I was redirected to a lot of other links so I tried to make that part more specific. However, when I went to the paper I couldn’t easily find it so I just let it be for now. I would recommend going into more detail about Tokunaga’s discovery if there’s anymore information out there.

Awesome work, Alice. Chickfilkay (talk) 02:02, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alice, great job creating this article! It is very thorough and contains a lot of great information. I thought the wing movements section was particularly interesting and well-written. I edited the article for grammar, punctuation and organization of writing. I also edited the article for concise and clear language. I added in hyperlinks I thought would be helpful. One issue I found is that there are sources missing in the lead section and in Larval Stage (sentences with no citation). In addition, another source in the lead section and for “Fishing baits” under “Interactions with humans” seems questionable (the Weblio article written in Japanese, not a secondary source or a peer-reviewed journal). I translated the page but didn't see information on the fly being used as bait. I separated out the first paragraph in the description into a separate section of “Taxonomy” because the information seemed more relevant with that organization. I didn’t think “Swarming” and “Mating” fit under “Social behavior,” which is listed in the suggested Diptera article formatting as “Larval sociality (e.g gregariousness). Adult sociality.” Thus, I separated “Mating” and “Swarming” into their own sections. I changed “Relation to humans” to “Interactions with humans.” I moved the hemoglobin section out of “Interactions with humans” to be its own section because I think it can stand alone and doesn’t fit in the original heading. Overall though, you did a great job covering the broad aspects of the fly species and I enjoyed reading your article! Listephanie (talk) 21:31, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alice, this is a great article! I love that you were able to find so many pictures for this page to keep the reader interested. In my first read through I only did a bit of proofreading and rewording sentences that I felt were unclear. You originally had both morphology and wing movements under description, but it didn't feel appropriate for wing movements to be in that section so I moved it later in the article to be under "swarming" because they are similar topics. Your original description talked about its mimicry to mosquitoes so I moved that under a subhead of "mimicry". I also renamed the header about heh hemoglobin studies to be genomes and then added an introductory sentence to the studies at the beginning go that section. If you were to expand on this article I would suggest doing more research on the life history section to give more information on the egg, pupae, and adult stages. Mvardy417 (talk) 00:24, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I really enjoyed this article. One thing to remember is to not add any opinion-type of information. So I took out the part about them being ‘harmless’ so that it only says that they do not bite. I also removed your larval stage heading, since it was the only one under the life history heading and it didn’t add any information that really required its own section. I also formatted some of the pictures and modified their captions. One of my biggest suggestions is to summarize your intro section better and make it more concise. I did edit it for flow and clarity and I also added a sentence that was previously in the description section, in your intro. Good job! Asivamohan (talk) 04:07, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was a good read! Like other people said, some of the parts were very biased (i.e. residents that complain about these flies). Maybe these sections and titles can be updated so it's more about the flies themselves rather than the people? I made some edits in the nuisance (a title that may be changed) section so it's less repetitive and less strongly vocal. I also added in a picture of a mosquito. Other suggestions are to include more info about the fly itself, more info on the enemies section since that sounds interesting. Keep at it! Y.shiuan (talk) 05:08, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]