Deimatic behaviour 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: October 18, 2014. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
A fact from Deimatic behaviour appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 9 January 2013 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
To avoid redundancy, we normally do not repeat in captions what is already stated explicitly in section headings or the title of an article. There is no need to say an animal is a vertebrate in a section or gallery all about vertebrates, and the article is better off without such a statement. For this reason, I have cut a recent addition. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 08:01, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
I have just been editing the blue-ringed octopus article regarding the flashing of their rings when agitated. Some references state that the rings are visible even when the octopus is not being provoked. Should this be included in the "Deimatic or aposematic" section? DrChrissy (talk) 17:47, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
For the image "Colombian four-eyed frog, Pleurodema brachyops" I do not see how the image exhibits deimatic behavior. Going to the animal's page: "When threatened, the frog lowers its head and raises its rear. When the frog adopts this posture, the poison glands are also raised toward the predator." Here, the image just depicts the frog with its head raised. 2600:1700:4579:B80:A40D:D31B:3B16:DF34 ( talk) 02:19, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Almost half of the text in this article (and several of the images) discusses displays and defense mechanisms that are explicitly not deimatic behavior. Spiders and scorpions are not bluffing because species x, y, and z are immune to them. Moths are not bluffing some kind of retaliation by clicking while under attack. And rattle snakes? Srsly?
Some of these behaviors are even described as plain old aposematic within the article, with no explanation for their inclusion. 99.196.12.236 ( talk) 22:01, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Deimatic behaviour 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: October 18, 2014. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
A fact from Deimatic behaviour appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 9 January 2013 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
To avoid redundancy, we normally do not repeat in captions what is already stated explicitly in section headings or the title of an article. There is no need to say an animal is a vertebrate in a section or gallery all about vertebrates, and the article is better off without such a statement. For this reason, I have cut a recent addition. Chiswick Chap ( talk) 08:01, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
I have just been editing the blue-ringed octopus article regarding the flashing of their rings when agitated. Some references state that the rings are visible even when the octopus is not being provoked. Should this be included in the "Deimatic or aposematic" section? DrChrissy (talk) 17:47, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
For the image "Colombian four-eyed frog, Pleurodema brachyops" I do not see how the image exhibits deimatic behavior. Going to the animal's page: "When threatened, the frog lowers its head and raises its rear. When the frog adopts this posture, the poison glands are also raised toward the predator." Here, the image just depicts the frog with its head raised. 2600:1700:4579:B80:A40D:D31B:3B16:DF34 ( talk) 02:19, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Almost half of the text in this article (and several of the images) discusses displays and defense mechanisms that are explicitly not deimatic behavior. Spiders and scorpions are not bluffing because species x, y, and z are immune to them. Moths are not bluffing some kind of retaliation by clicking while under attack. And rattle snakes? Srsly?
Some of these behaviors are even described as plain old aposematic within the article, with no explanation for their inclusion. 99.196.12.236 ( talk) 22:01, 26 September 2023 (UTC)