Talk:Calliphora vicina

Untitled
Have a go at the internal links described below and in the archived review. If pages don't exist, that's ok. Create a stub or request a page be created.Heds (talk) 03:59, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

An excellent article to inform the public on the forensic importance of this species. Could you add a little more about the maggots and what makes them unique? Very good article.--165.91.80.115 (talk) 16:41, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I found this article very informative it goes into great detail describing the life cycle of the fly by telling how many hours it takes for each instar and how this can change at different temperatures. This part would definitely fit into what we have been talking about lately with life cycles and degree days. Overall I think this was a great article.Jdpage (talk) 17:27, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I would agree. You have already done some of this and I think it looks great. Maybe a little bit more of dumbing it down with the links you already have would benefit the Wiki world a bit more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stdkws1986 (talk • contribs) 17:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I am sure Calliphoria vicina is not the only one used for determining PMI. Is it just the most common used for this or do C. vicina PMI estimates retain more accuracy than others? Or are they just more commonly found making it easier for the forensic entomologist to initiate a Post Mortem Interval Estimation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcarriker5 (talk • contribs) 13:40, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

The only thing that I can see that needs improvement is that the biology section needs more internal links. Some links you could do are meron, coxa, and notopleuron. Basically you should link terms that an "Average Joe" wouldn't understand. --Angelina5288 (talk) 19:24, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. However, only coxa has a link on Wikipedia, so only it can be internally linked. Colstewart71639 (talk) 01:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

This is a good article. It goes into good depth about your species. You can tell a lot of effort went into this article.--Kmh2003 (talk) 07:59, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The section about distribution could be expanded more or just simply incorporated into another section. Also, it would be helpful to give the measurements for the size of the fly in both millimeters and inches. Great job on the article. Motoliyat (talk) 05:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Distribution
Heyy! So first I think that this is an excellent article!! I think that you could greatly expand on the toxonomy section as well as the distribution section. I think that it is well written adn this is the only thing that needs to be considered. Thanks for doing a great job!!megalatta (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 17:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey guys, I read the article and I think you did a great job. It is not that long, yet it gives readers just enough information to get a good glimpse at the characteristics of the blowfly. I do think that you could expand on the distribution sections. It is just one sentence and if you don't expand, its better to put it in the introduction or life cycle section. Otherwise, everything is great! Kt babe8 (talk) 01:18, 13 April 2008 (UTC)kt_babe8

This article looks great, one thing that might improve it is adding distribution information from outside the US and also be a little more specific as to what parts of the U.S this species is more prevalent. Hold323 (talk) 06:18, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

The article looked good i switched the behavior and PMI section because it seemed to flow better into the PMI section.--Escaladebball29 (talk) 22:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikispecies
Hey guys! I just wanted to let you all know about the Wikispecies project []. Your article fits in with their project, so look into it. ABrundage, Texas A&amp;M University (talk) 20:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

peer review
Very well done, this article is concise and clear looks as if your information suffices the vicina subject here. The behavior section was very interesting, kept my attention. Curious though as to why in the distribution section you put it as “The species predominates in Europe and the New World…” it is as if they spread around the time of colonization. How long ago do you think the species was distributed? I’m just curious here. The article is great and has everything it needs. Good job! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tallfoo2006 (talk • contribs) 02:58, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Great article very well researched and broken down. I loved the "behavior" section the most, sort of gives us a glance at their daily life. i'd love to see more pictures, (im a visual person :)) if possible. Agian good article and its easy to see alot of effort and research was put into it. Thanks and Gig 'Em (DivoTheAggie (talk) 21:55, 17 April 2008 (UTC))

In response to Colstewart71639, you can still link to articles that don't currently exist in case someone who visits your page would like to actually create the article. The links will appear red instead of blue. Some other suggestions: There's not much else to bring to your attention! good job Weilingz (talk) 02:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You can also link to blow-fly, which is an ENTO 431 page.
 * Please remember the in-class discussion we had about connecting insect evidence to insect colonization rather than post mortem interval.
 * You may want to alter your article so that PMI isn't mentioned before the PMI section.

This a good looking article. Maybe under the distribution can yall add some numbers for the species found in the US? Mikearq (talk) 5:38, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Your article is very short and to the point and very easy to read. I have two suggestions. The first is under Behavior 5 lines down, maybe replace found with discovered. Also if it would be more visual if you could provide a picture of the anatomy. Thanks. --Jordanmurphy (talk) 03:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

This is an interesting article especially the fact that these flies are prevalent in cooler temperatures, since most people associate flies with hot weather. My only critique is that the sentence "Case studies have shown that it is not first in arrival, but rather appears one to two days before Phaenicia sericata." is a little confusing, you might want to consider revising the wording of it. Phodges09 (talk) 19:15, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

This is a great article. It covers many of the important facets of the insect and its characteristics without going into gross detail that would be unecessary for the average wikipedia user. The only real critique that I have is that it seems to be written on a much higher level that your audience will most likely be from the wikipedia community. An explanatory diagram of the locations of the pleuron, spiracles, etc. would be extremely helpful in your identification section. I also think (especially for words that should have been linked but currently don't have pages on this site) that you might consider taking a minute or two to add a sentence explaining what it is or why it's important. The word that definitely sticks out to me for this improvement is cheotaxy. Obviously everyone in our class is aware of what this is and how it's used, but most aren't and I think it would add more substance to your article.

I really enjoyed the photos that you found and the formatting of the box for all of the scientific classification information. This information is very helpful and keeps me interested. If you could, it'd be great to get a close-up picture of the metallic outer covering or the spiracle (there might have been one in the class notes -- but I'm not sure). Otherwise, the article looks awesome! Great job. Good luck finishing up the article and replying to all of your comments. Kayla foster (talk) 02:50, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

I really liked the article. The only suggestion that I can offer is in the part on the life cycle. You might want to say that the numbers that you obtained for the different stages are at a constant temperature and you might want to list that temperature. And at the beginning of that section it talked about the threshold temperature. You might want to change that to upper threshold temperature, but this is not as big a issue.Ngjon87 (talk) 23:02, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey guys, great article. The only changes I would make is i'm not sure if the ammount of information on this particular fly is not very common or what, but the overall feel of the article being a scientific article it should be a little more in-depth. For example you could add a section on Control, and indicate the best methods of cultural, biological and chemical controls to overcome pest status of the pest if present in our society. But a great overall article here! Lebl37 (talk) 05:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

This is a good article overall. Since I know what this assignment is about I was able to follow along without any problems. I noticed that the last sentence of the intro ends saying, "...because of its consistent time of arrival." As a biased party I know exactly what you're talking about, but you might want to specify just where it that they're arriving for people who aren't in the know about this project. You should also link the scientific terms or give your own definitions for them so other people will be able to follow along. My only other critique is on the "Lifecycle" section: you've stated what the upper threshold temperature is, but what's the lower threshold temperature? This temperature is used for calculating degree days so it's pretty important. Other than that I would try reading it from the perspective of an outsider and fill in any information that is taken for granted that the reader will assume on his or her own. Nice job.Manwiches (talk) 14:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Good page overall. I would suggest including the term insect colonization time into your intro. You refer to C. vicinia as having a consistent time of arrival but to others without a background in forensic entomology that doesn't explain anything. You also say that this fly is important to forensic entomology but you don't say why. I think by using and briefly discussing insect colonization time your introduction paragraph will benefit greatly. Additionally I would suggest including some external links at the end of your page for those interested in more information about your topic. Alexxmacc (talk) 15:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * A picky, yet necessary, adjustment I would make is in regards to your subject-verb agreement. In some paragraphs, C. vicina is singular and other times it's plural. Because C. vicina is a species, it should be uniformly referred to as a singular noun. For example, "Calliphora vicina are found throughout the U.S." uses Calliphora vicina as a plural noun and "Calliphora vicina goes through five generations" uses it singularly. There are also a few cases where Calliphora vicina is typed out, and others where it is just C. vicina or C. vomitoria; while this seems like a meaningless adjustment, it is necessary when writing in encyclopedia format. This also applies to degrees fahrenheit and celsius (sometimes it's spelled out, other times it's described with a degree sign). Finally, the link to chaetotaxy is now a dead link; you can easily update this link to an external source, instead. Great, to-the-point article! JRechy (talk) 16:35, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

NICE! I like articles that dont take all day to sift through. Yours was short sweet and to the point. The pictures are excelent. I have mentioned earlier, I think that pictures really make or break articles of this nature. You guys did it right. Keep up the good work. DanielIsbell 1215 April 16 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielisbell (talk • contribs) 17:16, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

The article is very easy to read I like all the pictures but maybe add one of the insect in the larvea stage. Pictures of the different instars would help also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbmoeller (talk • contribs) 17:28, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

This is overall a good article. I saw only two problems that could be fixed before you submit your project for gradind. The first will not take long. You have two sections, distribution and behavior, that contain no "linked" words. Based on what other "wikipedians" have told my group, you should have at least one linked word in a section, which is not that hard to do. Secondly, I think you need to expand your PMI section. You describe the process, but you have no application of it. If you could a police case or some research that used your fly for PMI, I think that would be great. Cawinkler (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

All in all I liked the article. I find it interesting that Calliphora vicina are sometimes active at night. I would like to know under what conditions is the fly nocturnal. There seems to be alot of informtion known about the behavior of the fly which is good for your article. Also maybe some case studies could be added on your page if possible. Good job. Ms.mitch (talk) 18:26, 17 April 2008 (UTC)Ms.Mitch

Great article guys! The only thing that I would think about adding is the beetle impact that the larvae has on the body. Especially certain types of beetles that feed both on larvae and decomposing flesh. For some reason that was the only thing that jumped out at me while I was reading. Other than that I couldn't find anything else. The article was well formatted, researched and written. It conveyed a complex topic in an understandable manner, great job!Wateka (talk) 20:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

This article was very well written. It contained information that pertained to forensic entomology to give the reader an idea of how it can be used in the real world. You might want to add an example case of when C. vicina was used to solve a case and how that has influenced the use of forensic entomology. Some of the terminology used when describing C. vicina seemed extensive for the average person, so you might want to explain what you are talking about, i.e. sclerite, bristles on the meron, etc. Other than that, this article was very informative. JessicaD128 (talk) 23:20, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Howdy group, I think this project was put together very nicely. The only thing i would change would be to add some info of how the fly has been used in different entomology cases. Other than that congrats on a great job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dustinray52 (talk • contribs) 01:13, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Great article! Consider expanding by describing the larval, pupal, and adult stages in detail. These could go under the life cycle subheading as could be formatted as further divided subheadings.Catgirl357 (talk) 02:04, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Good job comparing C. vicina to C. vomitoria. That really helps when doing research or other things. It makes it easy for people to get information fast. Nice. Should life cycle be 2 words? In the section lifecycle...I'm not sure. Also, Post Mortem Interval Estimation, all words should be capitalized. Behavior section is also good. For the future, maybe add in a section on forensic importance so the article is correctly represented for ENTO 431. Or not, it's your choice. Overall, good article. Short and sweet. Kellyorr1 (talk) 02:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Good job with this article! I thought the use of C. vicina in forensic entomology was well explained and how different temperatures affect the development of larvae. I think in the future more information about mating/sex differences, social dynamics, and predator relationships could be added in order to make this a more well-rounded article about the fly, instead of only focusing on the behavioral aspects important to forensic entomology. Overall though, I appreciated the clear and concise information throughout. Christina.lindberg (talk) 14:48, 17 September 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:6C40:7500:1B06:F552:BD58:B956:3B6A (talk)

Pictures
Is there any way to use the photos on your page from Wikipedia commons? They are really good and high quality. If not, I would consider taking some more pictures in the lab that show more details. We're linking our page to yours! Alli5414 (talk) 16:15, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Just look at Calliphora_vicina, find the pic you like and add it using an image tag as you would a pic on wikipedia. If you like http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Unid Brachycera portait 20070604.jpg, just add [[Image:Calliphora_vicina_portrait.jpg|thumb]] and you would get...
 * --220.255.53.160 (talk) 03:38, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Those are beautiful pictures! Thanks for the link. Wudntulyk2no (talk) 06:13, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

This article is good, but is there any way ya’ll can cover more about the insect. I’ve read other insect articles and they go into the history, influences on humans, etc. This article has to be helpful to entomologists that have done this all there lives, and this article only covers the basics. Also, this article has to cater to children that might use this article. Terms like “meron” and “notopleuron” are too advantaced. Link terms like these to other articles so they can be explained. Remember, you have a wide range when it comes to you audience and you have to cater to both extremes. Other than that, this is a good article. --Sadiezapalac (talk) 17:34, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Calliphora vicina. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120206212427/http://www.brazoria-county.com/sheriff/id/bugs/blowfly_lifecycle.htm to http://www.brazoria-county.com/sheriff/id/bugs/blowfly_lifecycle.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080102070741/http://research.missouri.edu/entomology/casestudies.html to http://research.missouri.edu/entomology/casestudies.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:42, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Calliphora vicina, u, Face, DC 2014-04-24 -17.46.02 ZS PMax - USGS Bee Inventory and Monitoring Laboratory.jpg}} to appear as POTD soon
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File: will be appearing as picture of the day on December 6, 2019. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2019-12-06. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:10, 26 November 2019 (UTC)