Talk:Yellow-bellied toad

Orphaned references in Yellow-bellied toad
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Yellow-bellied toad's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "AmphibiaWeb": From Apennine yellow-bellied toad:  From List of amphibians of Great Britain: "Hyla arborea". Amphibiaweb.org. 2010. Retrieved 2 December 2010. 

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 08:11, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Behavioral Ecology 2022
— Assignment last updated by Qazwsx1515 (talk) 21:07, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Significant Addition
I added sections including Habitat & Distribution, Conservation, Reproduction & Life Cycle, Mating, Parental Care, and Protective Coloration & Behavior following Wikipedia's suggested formatting and have cited my peer-reviewed sources. Anikavarsani) 15:50, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Disease
In the conservation section it is cited that disease spread is a great contributor of the decline of the species and I think it would be good to add information on what species/parasites the frog faces. From this source it seems that these frogs can get infected by chytrid fungus and Ranavirus. Qazwsx1515 (talk) 22:13, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review
Edits made:

I reorganized the sections to follow the suggested format Professor Strassman posted. For example, it would make more sense to put the “Conservation” section after “Habitat and distribution” (rather than placing “Description” after “Habitat and distribution” like it was originally).

There are some minor grammar mistakes that I corrected in the lead section. I also edited some of the language in this area to make the message clearer.

The "Lifecyle" section only has one subsection: I just removed the heading and kept the “Tadpoles” subsection.

Suggested edits:

It might be better to avoid placing author names directly on the Wikipedia page (I looked specifically at the “Variation” section under the “Description” section), although this is just my opinion. Personally, I find that this places the focus of the article on the frog rather than the researchers. To give credit to the authors, just footnote it.

Under the “Conservation” section, I think it might be helpful to specify which diseases are affecting the Yellow-bellied toad. I know it may not mention any specifics in the primary sources, but it may be worth looking into.

I think the “Synonyms” section is usually in the Taxobox.

Putting the images within the text rather than at the end might enhance the reader’s experience.

Jsun2148 (talk) 19:53, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review
This article is very comprehensive and well-written! I do, however, feel like a few of the experimental processes (i.e., "This scientist did [blank]") and directly stating the findings instead. For example, under the variation header, you could make things more concise by just writing that they found eight variations of the species, and remove the "expanding on the three forms previously posited by Michalowski in 1958". I combined a few or sentences and also reworded/deleted some things under the parental care section to make things clearer and more concise. Finally, I added a bunch of hyperlinks to help future readers! B1deng (talk) 02:09, 21 October 2022 (UTC)