Talk:Heliconius charithonia
 | This article was the subject of an educational assignment in Fall 2013. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Washington University in St. Louis/Behavioral Ecology (Fall 2013)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki. |
 | Heliconius charithonia was nominated as a Natural sciences good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (November 15, 2013). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Correct nomenclature
[edit]The correct nomenclature of this butterfly is Heliconius charithonia. This is confirmed from LepIndex and Marrku Savela's online database from Lepidoptera. Its hard to fathom how a Linnaean original could have its name mis-spelt over time. Secondly, the butterfly appears to be more commonly known as the Zebra Longwing, it has even been declared the state butterfly of Florida in this name.
Since there are two common names which appear to be equally well known, I propose to move the page to 'Heliconius charithonia' with redirects from the two common names.
Observations are welcome.
Regards, AshLin 18:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Contributions for Behavioral Ecology class
[edit]I am a Washington University student and I added the mating system, feeding, migration and dispersal, and roosts sections as part of an assignment for my Behavioral Ecology class.
Morganclem (talk) 03:49, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
I also made edits to the intro section, added the Habitat section, and edited my reference list.
Morganclem (talk) 03:51, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
I cleaned up some grammatical mistakes to make the flow of the description better. I also consolidated headings.Npatel92 (talk) 01:00, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Addition of Behavior section
[edit]I added a section on behavior and subsection on defense against predators. In the future, more information could be added on predators and host plants. Maximilianzhang (talk) 23:53, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Lead section
[edit]I added a bit more information to the lead section so it could provide betters summary for the butterfly. A little more information on the lead section will be helpful.
Also, you use Antiaphrodisiac, but I was wondering if you meant anaphrodisiac. I made the link to direct to anaphrodisiac for now. Jychoe90 (talk) 10:52, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Edits
[edit]I made some grammar changes. Additionally, I would suggest looking into Wikipedia preferences for scientific versus common name usage. I also added some hyperlinks that I thought would make some terms and concepts more clear to readers. I think a section on territorial behavior, if present, could be added would be useful. I also think some information on the larvae and reproductive cycle would add to the breadth of your article. Ichooxu (talk) 02:51, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Review
[edit]I corrected one or two grammatical errors. Overall, your article was very good! I feel like, at this point, the wiki page has no information on the general information about the butterfly, so maybe adding information on its habitat, life cycle, and just the general physical description of the butterfly would be helpful. Also, I found the section on pupal mating a little confusing. The male copulates with the female while she is a female? What is the purpose of inserting his abdomen into the pupa? Is it still in the pupa when the female is emerging? What happens to the second male - you mention that it helps defend the female while the first male is copulating with it (while it is still in the pupal stage) - but what about after? Other than that, I thought it was very well written! Thatgirlnamedsofa (talk) 01:39, 2 November 2013 (UTC)thatgirlnamedsofa
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Heliconius charithonia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Quadell (talk · contribs) 13:28, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
Nominator: Npatel92
I see that you have nominated this article for GA status as part of a school project. I also see that the only change to the article that you made is to change one sentence and rename one header, and those contributions have since been overwritten.
This article does not meet the Good Article criteria. The lead does not follow Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, in that it has too many paragraphs, it provides information not found in the body, and it fails to adequately summarize the most important facts in the article. There does not contain nearly enough information about some important topics, such as the insect's habitat. The names of headers do not follow our manual of style. The sources do not support all information in the article, especially in the "Migration and Dispersal" section. There are other problems as well.
I'm going to quickfail this nomination. Please do not nominate articles for GA status unless you have substantially contributed to their content, and you believe they fulfill all of the criteria for GA status. – Quadell (talk) 13:28, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
More suggestions for improving this article
[edit]The article is very well written, and you have a lot of great info. I have a few suggestions on how to improve the article for good article status. First, the lead is rather long and contains information that is not found elsewhere in the article. I suggest moving this information into the article, under appropriate headings, and writing a new lead that summaries all the relevant information in the article. Since your article is heavy on behavior, the lead should reflect this. In the aposematism section, you mention mullerian co-mimics, without stating that they exhibit Mullerian mimicry, what it is, or who does co-mimics are. You might want to consider writing a separate paragraph for this information. I also suggest adding a taxonomy section, as well as pulling the life history information from the lead into its own section, and adding any additional information that you can find. You talk a lot about the different life stages in the behavior section, so it would be good to define those stages early on. Abuatois (talk) 03:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Good job, this article is very informative! Your lead is rather long and it's possible to move some bits to new sections entitled distribution, or description. In your behavior section, I also noticed that you continuously hyperlinked some terms such as "oviposition" and "spermatophore." I am wondering what the wikipedia policy for that is? Is it sufficient to just hyperlink it once? Wmhua (talk) 14:08, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Heliconius charithonia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130813031113/http://www.naba.org/chapters/florida/zebra.html to http://www.naba.org/chapters/florida/zebra.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:08, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Featured picture scheduled for POTD
[edit]Hello! This is to let editors know that File:Heliconius charithonia_2021.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for October 22, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-10-22. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! — Amakuru (talk) 12:51, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
|
Heliconius charithonia, commonly known as the zebra longwing or zebra heliconian, is a species of butterfly belonging to the family Nymphalidae. It is distributed across South and Central America and the U.S. states of Texas and Florida, with some migrations further north in the warmer months. Adult butterflies are monomorphic of medium size with long wings. On the dorsal side, the wings are black with narrow white and yellow stripes, with a similar pattern on the ventral side, but paler and with red spots. The wingspan ranges from 72 to 100 mm (2.8 to 3.9 in). The caterpillars are white with black spots and have numerous black spikes along their body. Adults roost in groups of up to 60 individuals on a nightly basis, returning to the same roost every night. These roosts provide protection to adults, the large groups deterring predators and retaining warmth. This H. charithonia butterfly was photographed in Hendry County, Florida. Photograph credit: Nosferattus
Recently featured:
|