Talk:Eastern three-lined skink

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 31 August 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Spirit LG.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 31 August 2021 and 10 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tulipsareverypretty.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:01, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Scientific name
Hi everyone! I have added to this article for a class assignment. Specifically, I have changed the scientific name to the one more commonly used in studies: from A. duperreyi to B. duperreyi. I added taxonomy, nomenclature, behavior, and conservation headings. I also added significantly to the reproduction heading as well. Thank you all for entertaining this!Tulipsareverypretty (talk) 23:34, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * For now I've changed back to Acritoscincus. The text said Modern research refers to the skink as Bassiania duperrey (Hutchinson et al 1990) with a reference at the end of the paragraph to the Reptile Database here. But the Reptile Database uses the genus Acritoscincus. So better reference(s) are needed for the use of Bassiania, preferably ones no more than 5–10 years old that discuss the taxonomy of the species. If the change is made, then the genus article at Acritoscincus needs to be changed as well. At present, Bassiana redirects to Acritoscincus, so a taxobox for "Bassiana duperreyi" would be inconsistent. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:09, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Peter, I am honestly a little confused about this as well. Databases like the ones that you and I have referenced use genus name Acritoscincus, but almost all the studies I found on this species use genus name Bassiania. Of note is the fact that the majority of these studies are authored by Shine, who uses that genus name. Studies in the time frame that you mentioned do use genus name Bassiania (like this recent one) but they aren't about taxonomy specifically. I am unsure about how to handle this. Appreciate your feedback.Tulipsareverypretty (talk) 19:51, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * as far as I can see, from searching via Google Scholar, Dubey & Shine (2010) is the last molecular phylogenetic study, and there don't seem to be any papers that meet the criterion no more than 5–10 years old that discuss the taxonomy of the species, so it is unclear how to handle this. But although they are divided, the majority of taxonomic databases currently in the taxonbars in this article and at Acritoscincus appear to accept the placement in Acritoscincus. So, given that Wikipedia prefers secondary sources, I would be inclined to keep to Acritoscincus, but with an explanation in the Taxonomy section that sources differ. However, if you prefer to change to Bassiana, this is also acceptable in my view, provided you use a secondary ref that supports this view, and maintain Wikipedia's internal consistency by changing Acritoscincus and creating an article rather than a redirect at Bassiana. Either way, the taxonbar needs fixing for both names, which I have done. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:06, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Revision
Hi! Some edits from a student and peer of User:Tulipsareverypretty. The article only had one image, but I could not find more images on Wikimedia or cc search (creative commons for free reusable content). I moved "Habitat" to be a subcategory of "Ecology," but then later decided it would be best in a new category with Geographic range to form "Distribution & Habitat." I revised "Effects of incubation temperature and elevation on hatchling development." I added some phrases to "Feeding behaviour" for disambiguation. The target site of lizards towards larger prey was repeated, so I combined the two instances and changed syntax.

10/21 Edits
Hello Everyone!

I edited this article today. I feel like it belongs under 'good article' status. First, I changed the format and the section headers. The section about climate change was added to the Conservation Section. Some subheading 1's were switched with 2's depending on how the article should read spatially. I also added to the etymology section and the reproduction section. Finally, I changed a lot of spelling errors and fixed sentence structure. The picture added is a range map from the IUCN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikhil.sekar (talk • contribs) 19:39, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Revision 10/21
Hello! I edited this article on 10/21. I believe this article belongs in the "good article" category because it has very relevant information that contributes to the advancement of public understanding about the lizard. I fixed a few spelling errors and the grammatical composition of certain sentences to make the structure more coherent. Ultimately, I enjoyed reading this article and I hope my edits helped the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pooja.neerumalla (talk • contribs) 19:39, 21 October 2021 (UTC)