Cabbage looper has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: April 25, 2018. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: CR.Tracy, S.srivatsa.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 16:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I'm working on improving this article as part of a class at Washington University. I've basically revamped the page, as numerous references led to dead ends or were not scientific sources. I've added the Taxonomy, Description and Life Cycle, Migration, Temperature, Mating Behaviors, Damage, and Management sections, including all subsections. I reformatted some images. I rewrote the Overview because the sources were not reliable. I also rewrote the Description because, before my edits, it was a series of phrases that were difficult to read. I also removed the Resistance section in order to focus more on behavioral information, but plan on adding information about that back once I've conducted more research. The only things I didn't change were the external links, Taxo box, and the phrase at the top saying that the cabbage looper is not to be confused with the cabbage moth. Please let me know what could be improved! Thanks Ericapryu ( talk) 20:50, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello all! I'm back and I've added more sections. I've added to some of my previous sections and reorganized them as well. I broke up the Mating Behaviors section because the Pheromones section was too big to be a subheader section, and it was weird to have the other Mating Behaviors grouped. Let me know what you think and if this would better organized in a different manner! I noticed that someone added back the "Resistance to Bt proteins" section that I had deleted the first time, and I put that under the Enemies sections and added complete citations. I'm probably going to add more to that section myself once I get around to it because I found more information about Bt and didn't have time to include it. Thanks! Ericapryu ( talk) 14:29, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi, awesome article! I learned so much about this species. All the sections are very thoroughly researched and detailed. The only things I would add are pictures of the host plants. I liked the pictures of the looper at different life stages so it would be nice to include some pictures of the host plants or even the caterpillars on the host plants. I also am curious about the cabbage moth. It would be interesting to add a section about how the two species differ since there is a little piece of text at the beginning of the article that says "Not to be confused with the cabbage moth." What makes the two species different? Why is one called a looper and one a moth? Overall really great job! Mullenm05 ( talk) 07:55, 9 December 2017 (UTC)mullenm05
This article says in the intro where on Earth the species is found (lives) but it does not do that in the article text below the intro. This is not really a problem for the reader, but it is required in a good article that every statement in the intro also is present in the main part of the article. A possible solution to this is to copy the range information in the intro to the paragraph named Migration and rename that paragraph accordingly. -- Ettrig ( talk) 06:07, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
I made that change. Still, I am missing any indication about the north-south dimension in Eurasia. Eurasia is a very big area. Is all of it covered?-- Ettrig ( talk) 06:11, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Chiswick Chap ( talk · contribs) 08:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Before I spend time on this, are you still around on this one? Chiswick Chap ( talk) 08:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. | This is a thorough and well-cited student project. |
Cabbage looper has been listed as one of the
Natural sciences good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: April 25, 2018. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: CR.Tracy, S.srivatsa.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 16:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I'm working on improving this article as part of a class at Washington University. I've basically revamped the page, as numerous references led to dead ends or were not scientific sources. I've added the Taxonomy, Description and Life Cycle, Migration, Temperature, Mating Behaviors, Damage, and Management sections, including all subsections. I reformatted some images. I rewrote the Overview because the sources were not reliable. I also rewrote the Description because, before my edits, it was a series of phrases that were difficult to read. I also removed the Resistance section in order to focus more on behavioral information, but plan on adding information about that back once I've conducted more research. The only things I didn't change were the external links, Taxo box, and the phrase at the top saying that the cabbage looper is not to be confused with the cabbage moth. Please let me know what could be improved! Thanks Ericapryu ( talk) 20:50, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Hello all! I'm back and I've added more sections. I've added to some of my previous sections and reorganized them as well. I broke up the Mating Behaviors section because the Pheromones section was too big to be a subheader section, and it was weird to have the other Mating Behaviors grouped. Let me know what you think and if this would better organized in a different manner! I noticed that someone added back the "Resistance to Bt proteins" section that I had deleted the first time, and I put that under the Enemies sections and added complete citations. I'm probably going to add more to that section myself once I get around to it because I found more information about Bt and didn't have time to include it. Thanks! Ericapryu ( talk) 14:29, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi, awesome article! I learned so much about this species. All the sections are very thoroughly researched and detailed. The only things I would add are pictures of the host plants. I liked the pictures of the looper at different life stages so it would be nice to include some pictures of the host plants or even the caterpillars on the host plants. I also am curious about the cabbage moth. It would be interesting to add a section about how the two species differ since there is a little piece of text at the beginning of the article that says "Not to be confused with the cabbage moth." What makes the two species different? Why is one called a looper and one a moth? Overall really great job! Mullenm05 ( talk) 07:55, 9 December 2017 (UTC)mullenm05
This article says in the intro where on Earth the species is found (lives) but it does not do that in the article text below the intro. This is not really a problem for the reader, but it is required in a good article that every statement in the intro also is present in the main part of the article. A possible solution to this is to copy the range information in the intro to the paragraph named Migration and rename that paragraph accordingly. -- Ettrig ( talk) 06:07, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
I made that change. Still, I am missing any indication about the north-south dimension in Eurasia. Eurasia is a very big area. Is all of it covered?-- Ettrig ( talk) 06:11, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Chiswick Chap ( talk · contribs) 08:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Before I spend time on this, are you still around on this one? Chiswick Chap ( talk) 08:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | ||
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | ||
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | ||
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. | This is a thorough and well-cited student project. |