Talk:Papilio homerus

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Moid.ali. Peer reviewers: BoozalisHannah, Shreenidhipm, Felderp.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 06:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review
Mostly spelling, sentence structure, and grammatical changes. Made the geographic range section more neutral over whether two or three populations remain. I also added the names of two host plants. Excellent article with extensive information on behavior and conservation. Felderp (talk) 02:49, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Section headings and capitalization of common names
Just a note that on Wikipedia the standard way of writing section headings is in sentence case. That is, the first word is capitalized and subsequent words are not capitalized unless they include a proper noun. That's explained at MOS:HEADINGS in our Manual of Style. Also species common names are not capitalized except where they contain proper nouns (see MOS:LIFE). SchreiberBike &#124; ⌨  03:50, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Peer Review
Hi! This article was very thorough and informative! I corrected some spelling and grammatical errors, as well as adjusted what SchreiberBike suggested. I also added some useful hyperlinks and moved the reference numbers (they should be placed after punctuation). Overall, it was really well done! --BoozalisHannah (talk) 19:36, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Peer review #3!
Overall, this a well-written article. Information about the changes in population structure of butterfly due to anthropogenic activates is very useful considering its endangered status. I modified information about larval host-plants on the basis of the cited reference. I also moved the sections around a bit to improve flow. I added a couple of hyperlinks such as genetic bottleneck, and some host plants. I merged the brief etymology section to the lead of the article. Also, there are a couple of References in the article that probably do not use the Reference template. This could be remnants of an old version of the article, and a clean-up of that could spruce things up!Shreenidhipm (talk) 04:12, 6 October 2017 (UTC)