Jump to content

Talk:Earwig: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Cewbot (talk | contribs)
m Maintain {{Vital article}}: The article is listed in the level 5 page: General (41 articles) Configured as topic=Biology, subpage=Animals
Tag: Reverted
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Talk header}}
{{Talk header}}
{{Vital article|level=5|topic=Biology|subpage=Animals|link=Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/Biological and health sciences/Animals|anchor=General (41 articles)|class=GA}}
{{Vital article|level=4|topic=Biology|class=GA}}
{{Article history
{{Article history
| action1 = GAN
| action1 = GAN

Revision as of 17:28, 11 November 2022

Template:Vital article

Good articleEarwig 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 8, 2009Good article nomineeNot listed
December 2, 2009Good article nomineeListed
Current status: Good article
WikiProject iconInsects GA‑class Top‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
GAThis article has been rated as GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
TopThis article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discrepancy with Saint Helena earwig

This article says the Saint Helena earwig is "possibly extinct", while Saint Helena earwig says the species is "extinct". 173.235.20.20 (talk) 22:22, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vostox apicedentatus

Vostox apicedentatus was neglected as a native of North America: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vostox_apicedentatus 50.37.100.215 (talk) 17:35, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Read the text carefully because it is worded very precisely. The only "exclusivity" in the article is where it refers explicitly to the Northern US; the article does not bother to list the dozens of species native elsewhere in the US, which includes Vostox and a variety of other taxa. The purpose is not to list every species of earwig in the US, nor to suggest that the US lacks native species, but instead to point out that the native species are not broadly distributed. Dyanega (talk) 18:01, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]