Talk:Synthesiomyia nudiseta

Untitled
This is a wikipedia page made by students at Texas A&M University. We would appreciate any criticism and editing that the wikipedia community could provide. Thanks! amahajan17 (talk) 16:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Discussion
The introduction is a little characteristic heavy, you might want to add some more information about distribution and your other paragraphs to make it more like a summary. Also the requirement is to have 10 paragraphs, you guys only have 9 and that's if the Professor counts the intro and conclusion as a paragraph. Bbllr3431 (talk) 23:30, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

You did a great job on this article! I only have a few suggestions. First, under the "Anatomy & defining characteristics" section, you mention C. rufifaces but you hadn't yet mentioned that specific species, so you need to write out Chrysomya and then you can abbreviate it the next time you mention it in the "Diet" section. Also, when you have temperatures, you might want to also put the farenheit equivalent to make it easier for people to understand, since we use farenheit more often in everyday life. Finally, in the "Forensic importance" section, in the last sentence you wrote "...the flesh fly genus Sarcophaga". I think you need to italicize Sarcophaga if it's a genus. Besides those suggestions, I thought it was a well thought out and very informative article. Great use of pictures!TXAG09 (talk) 20:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Minor edits
I saw that there were quite a few red links so I fixed a few using piped links. As for the rest of the red links, the terms could be explained within the article for readers to have a better understanding. Hope this helps! --Jdarnell (talk) 17:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Overall the article is great! You did a really good job. My suggestions is for when you want to make a link show something, but link to a different page, which is called "piping" (WP:PIPE). For example, in your "Classification" section, you have pipelined to several words including larvae, Costa Rica, Malaysia, etc. When you linked to synanthropic, there is not a Wikipedia page to go to by that name. This is shown by the color of the words which are red. The word synanthropic can be linked to the Wikipedia article Synanthrope by way of the pipeline. When entering that it would look something like synanthropic. This way even though the word is not the exact same one that the Wikipedia article of synanthrope it will still correctly link to the article. Under the introduction the links of the words plumose, aristae, and time of colonization need to be corrected. Under the section “Anatomy and Defining Characteristics” the pipes of peritreme and plumose aristae need to be fixed. Also in the Taxonomy box the pipes of the Tribe Reinwardtiini and Genus Synthesiomyia need to be fixed as well as Van Der Vulp. If you cannot find an article that will link to the words in red than the best thing to do would be to delete the brackets around the word. Overall the article looks good!--Aggiegirl5039 (talk) 18:21, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

-Your article was very thorough and informative. I found it very interesting. Both the Anatomy and Defining Characteristics section and the Life Cycle section were very full of information. I also like the fact that you put numerous pictures in your article in addition to your main one. I have only a few small suggestions. The first sentence of the Forensic Importance section can be split in to two separate sentences. The sentence would flow better if written, "Synthesiomyia nudiseta is a species that is found to be quite necrophilous. Like other Muscidae species, it prefers to surround itself in a wide range from garbage to human and animal remains." Also, the sentence in the same section starting with "Pupa have typically been found in victims’ clothing, like in places such as the elastic waistbands of pants..." the word "like" is unnecessary as well as the comma behind clothing. The second to last sentence in that same section does not need the comma, and the very last sentence needs a comma after "for instance." Other than those very minor grammatical errors, this article was great. Very good job. --Joshfinch10 (talk) 05:30, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

This article is very nicely written and contains nice, precise information that is understandable for readers who do not know much about entomology. There are some minor changes I would like to suggest. It would be easier to read the article if you double spaced between each of your paragraphs. There is a sentence in the second paragraph of the Classification section, "Synthesiomyia nudiseta is essentially a kind of necrophagous." This sentence did not make sense to me; maybe you could revise it so it can become a little clearer such as "...necrophagous fly". Also I have a suggestion for the life cycle section. Because it contains so much information on each phase of the insect, maybe you could create sub categories such as "egg stage, larval stage, etc.". This will make it less straining to read. Overall, a job well done! Maryam618 (talk) 07:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Your article was very well written and interesting. I really enjoyed all of the pictures in the article.I only have a couple of suggestions. In your first paragraph there is a sentence (I think it is the second one ) that says that the fly has halteres. While this is an interesting fact it didn't seem to flow very well in the introduction and seemed kind of random. This sentence might flow better in the Anatomy section or in the sentence following it. Also there are a couple places in the article where you spell out completely Synthesiomyia. You may want to abbreviate it S. nudiseta in these places since you have already established that it is Synthesiomyia in previous statements and in the rest of the article you abbreviate it. Overall this was a really well written and thoughtful article! Great Job! Ayoussef17 (talk) 22:29, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Copy editing
I'm making the article more concise and conforming it to the Manual of Style. Fly biology is not my strong suit, so if I inadvertently change the meaning of a sentence, please let me know. --Gimme danger (talk) 12:40, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Classification details
I noticed that under your classification section you included some details about the number of generations per year as well as how higher temperatures led to an increased amount of development. I think that it might be useful to move this information to the Life cycle section, since this is where all of the detail about development at different temperatures takes place. Those two short sentences under classification just didn't have that much detail, and I think moving it would help the article flow. Bg27 (talk) 19:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Section Headers
This article was obviously thoroughly researched and is extremely well written and developed. Alos, very good use of pictures. The only suggestion I have is based on a critique that I received on my article. I was told that words in the section headers such as "Habitats/Diet", "Stages of Life", "Effects on Sheep", "Ways to Control Infestation", "Forensic Importance", and "Ongoing Research", only the first word of section headers should be capitalized (unless there's a name involved)." Hope this helps! Alexandra.anzaldua (talk) 16:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

A Few Edits
Overall, this is a very good article. I just had a few suggestions. First, in the introduction, you may want to include a bit about its forensic importance and its distribution, so that the introduction is a more well-rounded summary. Also, under the anatomy section, I was a bit confused as to which characteristics were adult characteristics and which were larval. Lastly, in this same section, both S. nudiseta and C. ruffifaces need to be italicized. You may want to go through the rest of the article and check all those scientific names. You did a great job! Mereharton (talk) 16:58, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Good start on the article! I would suggest changing the first sentence to "Synethesiomyia nudiseta is one of the largest flies in the family Muscidae." In the anatomy and defining characteristics and throughout the article make sure your measurements are presented in both metric and US/imperial units. This is most easily done using the 'convert' template. So for the first measurement in this article, you could use "convert|7|to|10|mm|in|sigfig=1" enclosed in. Also, the two pictures by life cycle and diet look very similar. It may be beneficial to delete one of these pictures because you already have three other very good pictures. Other than that it looks good! Shealamartin (talk)

Really great article! The only thing I can see that could be improved is the fluidity of the "Classification" section. The first two sentences seem isolated from the rest of the section. Otherwise you did an excellent job. Simonthelion (talk) 21:39, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Great Job! The only advice I have would be to include more in the Distribution section. Since your fly is located in the subtropical region it might be common insect of Peru, Argentina, or Australia just to name a few. It might be nice to include these locations if it is, in fact, collected here. Mnf238 (talk) 03:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Well done. Just a few minor edits. The Classification paragraph seems a little disjointed in that the sentences don’t seem to related directly to one another, at least not in the order in which they are currently arranged. Also, the reference to “range of post-death” is a little unclear. Are you referring to post-mortem interval? In Anatomy and defining characteristics I would recommend linking to the Muscina and C. rufifacies pages. The first paragraph of the Life cycle section could be condensed, I would recommend something along the lines of “these flies are among the first to arrive at their food source and lay their eggs. However, S. nudiseta larvae develop more slowly than those of other fly species which may arrive at the same time”. I’m not sure what is meant by the final sentence of the paragraph, but I believe you meant “pupation” not “pupatation”, so that should be changed as well. Ag2012 (talk) 19:59, 16 April 2009 (UTC)