![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
I'm of the opinion a taxobox image should be of the highest quality available, and, at the very last, have some semblance of identifiability about it. The image should be a closely cropped representation of the organism in question; vast amounts of "dead air" or flowers, what have you, all look nice but do nothing to help define the subject. "Featured" images may be wonderful pictures, for sure, but the voting of lay members says nothing about the suitability of an image for taxobox use; indeed, the fact a photograph was "featured" says nothing about the provenance or identity of the organism.
Identifying insect specimens strictly from photographs is a dicey propositon at best. Unless a particular species has such an outstanding and unique set of characteristics that are easily seen and agreed upon by a fair number of those familiar with entomology and the structures in question, rarely can an identification to species be made. Most photographs can only yield identfications to family or genus level - and many of those are educated guesses.
I would venture to demand some sort of citation or supporting data underlying all images of insects deemed to be identified to species level, and the same for general identifications. The taxobox image should have at least one qualified expert concur with the designation. (In my humble opinion).
It is for these reasons stated I am replacing the taxobox image with one of my own, along with supporting data and references. I am also going to edit other poor quality and guessed at specimens on this page.
The Tachinids are an important family within Diptera; we'd best have a good article for these critters.
NOTE: having long bristles on the abdomen is not necessarily an indicator of Tachinidae!
Nickrz
05:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Can somebody clarify the last phrase of the following sentence?
Does it mean that usually a host individual has only one maggot? — JerryFriedman (Talk) 01:52, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Is this statement encyclopedic: "...more than 8,200 known species and many more to be discovered."? This is only speculation, isn't it? Paulburnett ( talk) 15:36, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
I am re-inserting Tachinidae.jpg as the taxobox image instead of File:Thomas Bresson - Tachina fera (by).JPG. Tachinidae.jpg has better quality, DOF, lighting and overall view of the fly compared to File:Thomas Bresson - Tachina fera (by).JPG. It is also a featured picture, making it one of the finest images of wikipedia. Not beong completely identified is not a minus point as this article is about the family and not a particular species. Please discuss changes -- Muhammad (talk) 18:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
image1
and image2
, but only a single caption, image2_caption
. This gave the impression that the caption applied to both image1
and to image2
, which is simply misleading. We don't know what species your image1
is, and labelling it as
Tachina fera, even inadvertently, must be avoided.A comment in the article refers to Tachinidae as generalist parasites. Some species are generalists but many, probably most, species have narrow host ranges. Vox Sciurorum ( talk) 20:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() |
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
I'm of the opinion a taxobox image should be of the highest quality available, and, at the very last, have some semblance of identifiability about it. The image should be a closely cropped representation of the organism in question; vast amounts of "dead air" or flowers, what have you, all look nice but do nothing to help define the subject. "Featured" images may be wonderful pictures, for sure, but the voting of lay members says nothing about the suitability of an image for taxobox use; indeed, the fact a photograph was "featured" says nothing about the provenance or identity of the organism.
Identifying insect specimens strictly from photographs is a dicey propositon at best. Unless a particular species has such an outstanding and unique set of characteristics that are easily seen and agreed upon by a fair number of those familiar with entomology and the structures in question, rarely can an identification to species be made. Most photographs can only yield identfications to family or genus level - and many of those are educated guesses.
I would venture to demand some sort of citation or supporting data underlying all images of insects deemed to be identified to species level, and the same for general identifications. The taxobox image should have at least one qualified expert concur with the designation. (In my humble opinion).
It is for these reasons stated I am replacing the taxobox image with one of my own, along with supporting data and references. I am also going to edit other poor quality and guessed at specimens on this page.
The Tachinids are an important family within Diptera; we'd best have a good article for these critters.
NOTE: having long bristles on the abdomen is not necessarily an indicator of Tachinidae!
Nickrz
05:09, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
Can somebody clarify the last phrase of the following sentence?
Does it mean that usually a host individual has only one maggot? — JerryFriedman (Talk) 01:52, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Is this statement encyclopedic: "...more than 8,200 known species and many more to be discovered."? This is only speculation, isn't it? Paulburnett ( talk) 15:36, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
I am re-inserting Tachinidae.jpg as the taxobox image instead of File:Thomas Bresson - Tachina fera (by).JPG. Tachinidae.jpg has better quality, DOF, lighting and overall view of the fly compared to File:Thomas Bresson - Tachina fera (by).JPG. It is also a featured picture, making it one of the finest images of wikipedia. Not beong completely identified is not a minus point as this article is about the family and not a particular species. Please discuss changes -- Muhammad (talk) 18:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
image1
and image2
, but only a single caption, image2_caption
. This gave the impression that the caption applied to both image1
and to image2
, which is simply misleading. We don't know what species your image1
is, and labelling it as
Tachina fera, even inadvertently, must be avoided.A comment in the article refers to Tachinidae as generalist parasites. Some species are generalists but many, probably most, species have narrow host ranges. Vox Sciurorum ( talk) 20:29, 14 March 2019 (UTC)