Jump to content

Talk:Bed bug: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:Bed bug/Archive 3) (bot
 
(42 intermediate revisions by 23 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{talk page header}}
{{Vital article|level=4|topic=Biology|class=B}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|1=
{{WikiProject Insects|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Medicine|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Home Living |importance=Low}}
}}
{{Article history
{{Article history
| action1 = GAN
| action1 = GAN
Line 15: Line 20:
| currentstatus = FGAN
| currentstatus = FGAN
| topic = Biology and medicine
| topic = Biology and medicine
}}
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject Insects|class=B|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Medicine|class=B|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Home living |class=B |importance=Low}}
{{WP1.0 |WPCD=y |class=B |importance=Low}}
}}{{press |subject = |author=Nicholson Baker |date=March 20, 2008 |url=http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2008/mar/20/the-charms-of-wikipedia/ |title=The Charms of Wikipedia |org=''[[The New York Review of Books]]'' {{subscription required}} |quote= }}
}}{{press |subject = |author=Nicholson Baker |date=March 20, 2008 |url=http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2008/mar/20/the-charms-of-wikipedia/ |title=The Charms of Wikipedia |org=''[[The New York Review of Books]]'' {{subscription required}} |quote= }}
{{EducationalAssignment|date=2008-03-21|link=Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/ENTO_431}}
{{Broken anchors|links=
* <nowiki>[[Cutaneous conditions#Morphology|blisters (wheals and bullae)]]</nowiki> The anchor (#Morphology) has been [[Special:Diff/742843314|deleted by other users]] before. <!-- {"title":"Morphology","appear":{"revid":347306973,"parentid":346980228,"timestamp":"2010-03-02T15:29:04Z","replaced_anchors":{"Morphological":"Morphology"},"removed_section_titles":["Morphological"],"added_section_titles":["Morphology"]},"disappear":{"revid":742843314,"parentid":742843237,"timestamp":"2016-10-06T04:17:37Z","removed_section_titles":["Morphology"],"added_section_titles":[]}} -->
}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}}
|archiveheader = {{Automatic archive navigator}}
|maxarchivesize = 70K
|maxarchivesize = 70K
|counter = 2
|counter = 3
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
Line 31: Line 34:
|archive = Talk:Bed bug/Archive %(counter)d
|archive = Talk:Bed bug/Archive %(counter)d
}}
}}
{{EducationalAssignment|date=[[2008-03-21]]|link=Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/ENTO_431}}

{{Archive box|auto=long|search=yes|[[Talk:Bedbug/Archive 1]] (before 2010)}}

== Requested move 18 October 2018 ==

<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;"><!-- Template:RM top -->
:''The following is a closed discussion of a [[WP:requested moves|requested move]]. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a [[Wikipedia:move review|move review]]. No further edits should be made to this section. ''

The result of the move request was: '''Reverted to status quo ante''', procedural close. See my comment below. [[User:No such user|No such user]] ([[User talk:No such user|talk]]) 13:36, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
----


[[:Bed bug (insect)]] → {{no redirect|Bed bug}} – Undiscussed move from a long-standing name, no other article with the same title, [[WP:COMMONNAME]] applies&nbsp;[[User:Brandmeister|Brandmeister]]<sup>[[User talk:Brandmeister|talk]]</sup> 22:26, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
:<small>This is a contested technical request ([[Special:Permalink/864704871|permalink]]). '''[[User:Sam Sailor|Sam]] [[User talk:Sam Sailor|Sailor]]''' 22:44, 18 October 2018 (UTC)</small>
* Ping {{u|Doc James}} for comment. &mdash; [[User:Frayae|Frayæ]] ([[User talk:Frayae|Talk]]/[[:is:Notandaspjall:Frayae|Spjall]]) 22:47, 18 October 2018 (UTC) {{Small|— {{Reply to|Frayae}} ... just in case he did not see [[Special:Diff/864504012/864707183]]? :) '''[[User:Sam Sailor|Sam]] [[User talk:Sam Sailor|Sailor]]''' 23:40, 18 October 2018 (UTC)}} {{Small|I didn't see that, he definitely knows now. {{smiley}} &mdash; [[User:Frayae|Frayæ]] ([[User talk:Frayae|Talk]]/[[:is:Notandaspjall:Frayae|Spjall]]) 23:45, 18 October 2018 (UTC)}}

=== Survey ===
:''Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with'' <code><nowiki>* '''Support'''</nowiki></code> ''or'' <code><nowiki>* '''Oppose'''</nowiki></code>'', then sign your comment with'' {{4~}}''. Since [[Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion|polling is not a substitute for discussion]], please explain your reasons, taking into account [[Wikipedia:Article titles|Wikipedia's policy on article titles]].''

*'''Oppose''' The term '''Bed bug''' is used equally to refer to [[bed bug infestation]]s and the [[bed bug (insect)]]. So a disambig makes sense. Stipulation that the article about the insect is about the insect will keep that article from filling full of none insect related stuff. If one looks at a google search for the term nearly all pages are mainly about the infestation with these bugs. [[User:Doc James|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Doc James|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Doc James|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Doc James|email]]) 00:14, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
*'''oppose''' agree w/ Doc James comment ''search for the term nearly all pages are mainly about the infestation''--[[User:Ozzie10aaaa|Ozzie10aaaa]] ([[User talk:Ozzie10aaaa|talk]]) 00:25, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
*'''Support''' reversion of this recent undiscussed move per [[WP:OVERPRECISION]] and [[WP:PRIMARYTOPIC]] [https://tools.wmflabs.org/pageviews/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&start=2018-07-20&end=2018-10-17&pages=Bed_bug|Bed_bug_infestation]. A [[bed bug]] is an insect. A [[bed bug infestation]] is an infestation of those insects. A bed bug infestation is not a bed bug and the article about it would not be titled "bed bug". If anything, the bed bug article could be viewed as a broad concept article, since it has a section "Infestation" with a "main article" link to [[bed bug infestation]]. Sending anyone searching for "bed bug" to a dab page is not helpful. (And as a matter of procedure, as a contested undiscussed move, this should have been automatically returned its stable title before this proposal was opened.) [[User:Station1|Station1]] ([[User talk:Station1|talk]]) 04:43, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
*'''Support''', this isn't how disambiguation is supposed to work. Considering that this article title was stable for 14 years then I don't see the need for an RM, just revert it. &mdash;[[User:Xezbeth|Xezbeth]] ([[User talk:Xezbeth|talk]]) 04:49, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
*'''Support.''' The disambig is redundant since the infestation is a daughter article of the original bed bug page.
:That being said, I would prefer to see the two pages merged someday since infestation pages have a tendency to have major redundancies that can usually be handled fine under one article. Not to mention that the human relation aspect is what usually drives significant content for most larger insect articles, so of course searches are going to talk about infestations primarily. That's for down the road though. [[User:Kingofaces43|Kingofaces43]] ([[User talk:Kingofaces43|talk]]) 06:45, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
*'''Strong support''' Per [[WP:DABCONCEPT]] the [[Bed bug infestation]] is a sub article. The other 3 topics are minor and appear to be "Bedbug" rather than "Bed bug" anyway, of which [[Bedbugs (album)]] is the only full match so I'd support keeping "Bedbug" redirecting to the insect to and maybe moving the DAB to [[Bedbug (disambiguation)]]. '''[[User:Crouch, Swale|<span style="color:Green">Crouch, Swale</span>]]''' ([[User talk:Crouch, Swale|<span style="color:Red">talk</span>]]) 08:38, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
*'''Support.''' And remind that no consensus means it gets moved back to what was before. [[User:Hyperbolick|Hyperbolick]] ([[User talk:Hyperbolick|talk]]) 12:56, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
----
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a [[Wikipedia:Requested moves|requested move]]. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Move review|move review]]. No further edits should be made to this section.''<!-- Template:RM bottom --></div>
*'''Comment''' I reverted the undiscussed move before seeing that this RM was open. Nonetheless, I think that the move overstepped being [[WP:BOLD]] far into "reckless" territory, leaving hundreds of incoming links to dab page for other people to sort out. Now that I saw that the RM is headed in the same direction, I'm inclined to procedurally close it and leave the onus of changing status quo to its challengers. I tend to agree with DABCONCEPT point that the infestation is a sub-article of the bug page, and the links that are meant for the infestation should be retargeted there, rather than inventing a dab page where there's nothing ambiguous. [[User:No such user|No such user]] ([[User talk:No such user|talk]]) 13:33, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

===Proposal===
Having reverted to status quo ante, I think that {{u|Doc James}} has a point that anyone searching for, or linking to, [[Bed bug]], has in mind more epidemiological aspects of bed bug infestations rather than learning about lifecycle and biology of the bed bug itself. As a matter of fact, most of our articles about parasitic and infectious diseases are structured so that the primary topic is about the illness, and near the top they link to an article about the causing organism itself (e.g. {{tq|'''[[Toxoplasmosis]]''' is a [[parasitic disease]] caused by ''[[Toxoplasma gondii]]''...}}). This one is a counterexample by necessity, because the "common name" "bed bug" relates to the organism rather than the infection/infestation.<br>I'm thinking about reshuffling the contents (mostly swapping the two pages) so that we have:
*Article about the bug's biology and physiology at ''[[Cimex]]'', its binomial name
*The "main", broad-concept article at either [[Bed bug]] or [[Bed bug infestation]], with [[Bed bug]] as the primary redirect.
I'm just thinking aloud, but I think we all should come to the best setup in an informal discussion rather than through a RM or similar process. Thoughts welcome. [[User:No such user|No such user]] ([[User talk:No such user|talk]]) 13:53, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
*'''Just merge them'''. Not like a disease where symptoms are known ages before the organism is determined. A bed bug infestation is just bed bugs in numbers. [[User:Hyperbolick|Hyperbolick]] ([[User talk:Hyperbolick|talk]]) 14:06, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
:*The catch is, the merged article would be somewhat overlong. If anything, the lengthy [[Bed bug#Description]] section is somewhat too technical entomology for an overview article and would be better placed into ''[[Cimex]]'' (now redirects here) or ''[[Cimex lectularius]]'' (the common bed bug). Once we get rid of that, I think they could be safely merged. [[User:No such user|No such user]] ([[User talk:No such user|talk]]) 14:12, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Just discovered [[/Archive 2#Challenges to organizing content]] written by {{u|Blue Rasberry}} back in 2017 so pinging him as well. You don't seem to have implemented much of your proposal from the time, did you? [[User:No such user|No such user]] ([[User talk:No such user|talk]]) 14:56, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
::[[User:No such user]] and [[User:Hyperbolick]] agree those are excellent suggestions. The information about this genus can go at ''[[Cimex]]''. The disease can go at bed bug.
::We already have an article about the family which is [[Cimicidae]]
::So basically it would be a merge of [[bed bug infestation]] into [[bed bug]] with a split off of much of the description into a new article on the genus ''Cimex''. Happy to carry this out if their are not objections. [[User:Doc James|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Doc James|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Doc James|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Doc James|email]]) 15:18, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
::: Good. [[User:Hyperbolick|Hyperbolick]] ([[User talk:Hyperbolick|talk]]) 15:47, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
:::Let us wait for a week or so, shall we, to iron out the details? There is no deadline. For example, in the meanwhile I learned that most of the content of [[Bed bug#Description]] actually pertains to ''[[Cimex lectularius]]'', as the genus ''Cimex'' contains several bug species affecting bats and birds, and only two affecting humans. ''[[Cimex]]'' should thus only be either a short taxonomic article, or perhaps a redirect to [[Cimicidae]]. Let us not rush to implementation like you did the last time... :) [[User:No such user|No such user]] ([[User talk:No such user|talk]]) 15:51, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
::::Been working on this article for more than 8 years. Waiting another week is no big deal. [[User:Doc James|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Doc James|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Doc James|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Doc James|email]]) 17:49, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
:::::agree--[[User:Ozzie10aaaa|Ozzie10aaaa]] ([[User talk:Ozzie10aaaa|talk]]) 14:31, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
::::::Took an initial attempt at it. We could bring back more material from ''[[Cimex]]'' but agree it is fairly technical. [[User:Doc James|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Doc James|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Doc James|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Doc James|email]]) 19:32, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
:::::::I would argue at the very least that the infobox should contain a picture of an adult specimen rather than bites. [[User:IAMGOOMBA|IAMGOOMBA]] ([[User talk:IAMGOOMBA|talk]]) 20:21, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
::::::::Yah the first image was a little blurry anyway. [[User:Doc James|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Doc James|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Doc James|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Doc James|email]]) 17:27, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
:::::::I restored some of material from ''[[Cimex]]'', summarizing the key aspects of bug description and behavior without entering into too much detail. No opinion about the best infobox picture. [[User:No such user|No such user]] ([[User talk:No such user|talk]]) 09:29, 26 October 2018 (UTC)

==First sentence==

Keeping the first sentence simple IMO is very important. Thus

*"'''Bed bugs''' are a type of [[insect]] that feed on human [[blood]], usually at night."

is better than

*"'''Bed bugs''' are insects from the genus ''[[Cimex]]'' that feed on human [[blood]], usually at night."

The genus can go later in the lead. [[User:Doc James|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Doc James|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Doc James|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Doc James|email]]) 23:13, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
::The goal is not to fill the first sentence with none common words. The term "genus" is not well known and not really needed in the first sentence. [[User:Doc James|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Doc James|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Doc James|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Doc James|email]]) 22:52, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

* '''Option #2''', "...are insects from the genus ''[[Cimex]]''..." is what I prefer. I don't think it complicates things. [[User:Yilloslime|Yilloslime]] ([[User talk:Yilloslime|talk]]) 00:46, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
* '''Option #2'''. Neither the MOS nor general practice require keeping the first sentence ''that'' simple, and I was arguing #1 is downright dumb. ''Species'' and ''genera'' are basic biological terms and, as far as I remember, they are introduced around 8th grade of the basic school; thousands of our articles about plants and animals start off in manner similar to #2. Per [[MOS:OVERLINK]] {{tq|the following are not usually linked... Everyday words understood by most readers in context,}} and both "insect" and "blood" qualify. Instead, we should immediately provide links to the most relevant article, and it is certainly the one about the lifecycle of bed bugs themselves, i.e. ''[[Cimex]]''. [[User:No such user|No such user]] ([[User talk:No such user|talk]]) 08:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)


== Redirect ==
== Lifetime of a bedbug ==


The article states that a bedbugs can survive without feeding for 70 days and then later states that bedbugs can survive without food for 100 to 300 days. [[Special:Contributions/2A01:B340:60:60CA:E13D:5117:444D:E5F3|2A01:B340:60:60CA:E13D:5117:444D:E5F3]] ([[User talk:2A01:B340:60:60CA:E13D:5117:444D:E5F3|talk]]) 08:42, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
Hi, [[Bed bug (insect)]] redirects to [[Cimex]]. Only two of the Cimex species are known as bed bugs, according to the article Cimex. But the article Cimex is about the whole genus. So please redirect from [[Bed bug (insect)]] to the article about the two species known as bed bugs, which is this article here, [[Bed bug]]. {{ping|Doc James}} --[[User:Distelfinck|Distelfinck]] ([[User talk:Distelfinck|talk]]) 11:21, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
::The insects known as bed bugs are discussed at [[Cimex]] so no issue with it directed there. [[User:Doc James|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Doc James|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Doc James|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Doc James|email]]) 11:23, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
: Fixed (reconciled two sources; neither source mentioned the figure of "70 days" that I could see). <b>[[User:Ohnoitsjamie|OhNo<span style="color: #D47C14;">itsJamie</span>]] [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|<sup>Talk</sup>]]</b> 12:58, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
::: The insects known as bed bugs are also discussed at [[Bed bug]], as they are the only topic of the article [[bed bug]]. [[Bed bug]] is the more specific article as the [[Cimex]] article also discusses species not called bed bugs. What you are getting at I think is that maybe the [[Cimex]] article has more information. But then that information should be moved over to the [[Bed bug]] article --[[User:Distelfinck|Distelfinck]] ([[User talk:Distelfinck|talk]]) 13:15, 28 February 2019 (UTC)


== Unclear and blocked citations ==
[[User:Doc James|Doc James]], [[Bed bug]] and the redirect [[Bed bug (insect)]] have the exact same topic, but you think it's better to redirect from [[Bed bug (insect)]] to the supertopic [[Cimex]] in this case. Wouldn't it then follow that [[Bed bug]] should also redirect to the supertopic? --[[User:Distelfinck|Distelfinck]] ([[User talk:Distelfinck|talk]]) 01:17, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
::Bed bug also discusses a lot of information not specifically about the insect such as the bits and health consequences.
::Cimex is a subtopic about the organism itself. [[User:Doc James|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Doc James|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Doc James|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Doc James|email]]) 02:05, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
::: The word "insect" doesn't indicate that it's only about the organism itself. You could make a redirect [[Bed bug (organism)]] and redirect it to [[Cimex]]. But [[Bed bug (insect)]] belongs to the topic of [[Bed bug]] and therefore should redirect there --[[User:Distelfinck|Distelfinck]] ([[User talk:Distelfinck|talk]]) 03:00, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
::: Okay, wait a minute. If as you say the article [[Bed bug]] includes information that is not fit for an article about the insect, that would mean we should remove that information. Or rename the article to indicate it's not only about the insect --[[User:Distelfinck|Distelfinck]] ([[User talk:Distelfinck|talk]]) 03:10, 3 March 2019 (UTC)


Citation 5/8 (why does it change to 5 when editing??) is blocked by a paywall. Other sources suggested. There are other sources, but it's far too many articles to reasonably get the referenced, rather basic info from. [[User:FormalityInducer|FormalityInducer]] ([[User talk:FormalityInducer|talk]]) 17:06, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
== Wording ==


:See [[WP:PAYWALL]] - paywalled sources are acceptable here. [[User:MrOllie|MrOllie]] ([[User talk:MrOllie|talk]]) 17:18, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Plantdrew, you reverted an edit I made in the first sentence of the article. It seems you prefer "Bed bugs are a type of insect..." over "Bed bugs are insects...."
== "[[:Bedbg bite]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] ==
Your rationale, as far as I can tell, for the former, is, "not all bloodfeeding insects are bedbugs"
[[File:Information.svg|30px]]
The sentence ""Bed bugs are insects that feed on human blood" does not in any way suggest that bed bugs are the only insects that feed on blood. I disagree that it is preferable, in terms of style or accuracy, to say "Bed bugs are a type of insect..." because bed bugs are not a type of insect. The term, as the article says, refers to two species of the genus ''Cimex''.
The redirect <span class="plainlinks">[//en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Bedbg_bite&redirect=no Bedbg bite]</span> has been listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|redirects for discussion]] to determine whether its use and function meets the [[Wikipedia:Redirect|redirect guidelines]]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 4#Bedbg bite}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> [[User:Plantdrew|Plantdrew]] ([[User talk:Plantdrew|talk]]) 03:48, 4 May 2024 (UTC)


== Reverse author order in references ==
I agree "exclusively" should be changed. It was intended to convey obligate hematophagy, but if bed bugs do feed on other species, this could be read as inaccurate.[[User:Michaplot|Michaplot]] ([[User talk:Michaplot|talk]]) 22:38, 11 July 2019 (UTC)


:I changed it back to the original {{tq|Bed bugs are insects from the genus ''Cimex'' that feed on human blood, usually at night.}} that was supported 2:1 in the informal RfC above, and is completely defining and grammatical. I still don't see what's wrong with that form, except that some feel it is not simple enough, something I strongly disagree with. [[User:No such user|No such user]] ([[User talk:No such user|talk]]) 21:20, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
Reference 62 and 63 appear to present the authors in reverse order (starting with the last author and working backwards). Is this intentional? I haven't checked all other references but the few I did check don't appear to have this issue. Steffen Roth is the first (and corresponding) author on both of these papers, not Reindhart. [[User:Frosck|Frosck]] ([[User talk:Frosck|talk]]) 23:28, 22 September 2024 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:20, 23 September 2024

Former good article nomineeBed bug was a Natural sciences good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 18, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
November 11, 2013Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee

Lifetime of a bedbug

[edit]

The article states that a bedbugs can survive without feeding for 70 days and then later states that bedbugs can survive without food for 100 to 300 days. 2A01:B340:60:60CA:E13D:5117:444D:E5F3 (talk) 08:42, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed (reconciled two sources; neither source mentioned the figure of "70 days" that I could see). OhNoitsJamie Talk 12:58, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear and blocked citations

[edit]

Citation 5/8 (why does it change to 5 when editing??) is blocked by a paywall. Other sources suggested. There are other sources, but it's far too many articles to reasonably get the referenced, rather basic info from. FormalityInducer (talk) 17:06, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:PAYWALL - paywalled sources are acceptable here. MrOllie (talk) 17:18, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect Bedbg bite has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 4 § Bedbg bite until a consensus is reached. Plantdrew (talk) 03:48, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse author order in references

[edit]

Reference 62 and 63 appear to present the authors in reverse order (starting with the last author and working backwards). Is this intentional? I haven't checked all other references but the few I did check don't appear to have this issue. Steffen Roth is the first (and corresponding) author on both of these papers, not Reindhart. Frosck (talk) 23:28, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]