Wikipedia:Peer review/Cleridae/archive1

Cleridae

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for March 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for March 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review for any constructive suggestions and criticism, content and grammar checking, and any general ways to improve this article. Thanks, Blm2010 (talk) 01:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article and overall fairly well done, here are some suggestions for improvement.
 * The images are lovely, but one of them appear to violate copyright / the terms of the license under which they are made available. For example File:Thanasimus dubius on bark.jpg is a free image because is US government work (USDA employee), but File:Trichodes nutalli.jpg is not free for use on Wikipedia as its licence is Creative Commons but for non-commercial use. I have nominated it for deletion on Commons as a copvio.
 * Per WP:MOS, images should be set to thumb width to allow reader preferences to take over. For portrait format images, "upright" can be used to make the image narrower.
 * The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article and needs to be expanded. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. Please see WP:LEAD
 * Per WP:CITE references come AFTER punctuation, and are usually at the end of a sentence or phrase so fix things like Their tarsal formula is 5-5-5[3], meaning that on...
 * Article is generally well-cited, but needs more references in some places. For example This trait is very important in correctly differentiating checkered beetles from Melyridae. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
 * Example species in "Feeding Habits" section need refs.
 * Per WP:HEAD headers are not capitalized correctly - "Feeding Habits" should be "Feeding habits" as one example.
 * I would try to give more specifics in addition to the vague generalities. Things like These beetles can be found in numerous areas as well due to the great variety in trees across the world. really tell me nothing without more details - an example or two from each continent where they are found might help.
 * Watch disambiguation links (or dabs) tarsi is a dab. Generally the first example is linked too.
 * Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. cite web and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
 * Per WP:JARGON watch technical terms and try to explain them, especially if they are not linked. This is done well in some places, but not in others Their elytra have tiny pits or depressions, and never expose more than two dorsal plates (tergites).[3] No clue waht an elytra is, nice explanation of tergites.
 * Article has several fairly short (one or two sentence) paragraphs that impede the flow - these should be combined with others or perhaps expanded.
 * Be consistent throughout - "N. rufipes" is italicized one place (correct) and not in another, for example.
 * A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. Chrysiridia rhipheus is an insect WP:FA and may be a useful model article

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:38, 30 March 2009 (UTC)