Talk:Common parsley frog

New Comment- Changes and Deletions 10/13/22
Previous comments on this post about the range of the parsley frog as well as its tadpole size, amplexus habits, and clutch were very closely taken from source 5. I deleted the content, read source 5, and used it to create statements that were not copied or plagiarized, but rather succinctly summarized the information. I just wanted to note here on the talk page that some content was deleted for not having any citation or source and/or being taken too closely from a source.

Thank you!

Gracedekoker (talk) 20:24, 18 October 2022 (UTC)Grace Dekoker

Wiki Education assignment: Behavioral Ecology 2022
— Assignment last updated by CalJS (talk) 20:03, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review
Edits made:

I removed the word ecology from the “Ecology and behavior” subsection to limit redundancy.

Suggested edits:

There are some areas of the text where citations are needed. I would also try to add a citation to every sentence; specifically, the last sentences of some of the paragraphs are missing citations. It may just be that those sentences were cited by the footnote before, but it may be good to clarify.

One section that I was confused about was the tadpole behavior. I’m not sure what “notoriously poor competitors” consists of. Does it cohabiting with other frogs make them poor competitors or is their inferiority (relative to other species) when fighting for resources like food?

Another suggestion might be to move the descriptions about declining populations from the habitat section to the conservation section, but I think it’s also fine where it is.

Maybe adding an image or two would make the article more engaging!

Jsun2148 (talk) 19:44, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review
I think there should be subsections added that explain the type of predators and prey the common parsley frog interacts with. I think the lead section may have too much detail regarding the description of the frog, it may be repetitive. A picture of the frog mid-jump or of the tadpole may be beneficial. Also a description of what the tadpole looks like can be added under the description section. I added the fact that the frog is highly adaptable and protected under European law to the lead section as that is important information that should be included. There is some information that is not cited. Other than that, the article is well written and goes in depth.

Friedaloo (talk) 1:54, 20 October 2022 (UTC)Friedaloo

Revisions and recommendations
It seems that the majority of the content under the “Description” section is directly copied from the introduction section. Perhaps the repeated sentences could be removed for the sake of being concise? I think that an additional sentence explicitly stating why two separate mating seasons is evolutionary beneficial could be useful. All the invasive species mentioned under the Climate Change section can be listed in the first paragraph of the section to serve as an introduction of what is to come next. I also italicized the scientific name of the frog whenever I saw it un-italicized, along with the names of closely related parsley frogs.

There is an incomplete sentence under the Climate Change section: "The presence of this fish, as well as American red swamp crayfish Procambarus clarkii." Froggo1324 (talk) 23:35, 18 October 2022 (UTC)