Talk:Coccinellidae

Clumping

Why do they clump together by the thousand? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.120.57.113 (talk • contribs) 03:59, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

For warmth —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.230.154 (talk • contribs) 05:47, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

plops of poop sometimes have mass numbers of ladybugs mating in them. if you come across mating ladybugs mating, run, they will kill you and then crawl in you anal orophist for warmth! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.118.193.41 (talk) 18:41, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Genera

Perhaps the genera should go into a separate article. Also, http://www.wbrc.org.uk/WorcRecd/Issue12/ladybird.htm mentions additional subfamilies Rhyzobiinae, Platynaspinae, dunno how those fit in. Stan 17:26 16 May 2003 (UTC)

Indeed. That is the longest tatobox I have ever seen. :) Bryan

Commonwealth

Is Commonwealth an appropriate description here? Canada is part of the Commonwealth, but we call these ladybugs (it's a better name, I think, since they aren't birds but are bugs, just not true bugs). On the other hand, Canada is weird thanks to its proximity to the USA.

You're right, not many Canadians use it. Exceptions include Canada Agriculture, an Albertan museum. But I think Australian and New Zealander Englishes use "ladybird." I've changed it to "North American English" and "some Commonwealth English]] dialects". Is there a more concise way? --Menchi 05:26 26 May 2003 (UTC)

I believe the most appropriate would be to remove "(Commonwealth English)" and change "ladybug" to "(in North America)", I'm none too keen on these national derivations of English, anyway. Of course, technically that will include Mexicans and whatnot, but I would imagine the Mexicans that speak "English" will be heavily influenced by the U.S. just like the Canadians. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.78.160.254 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 11 January 2005 (UTC)

We use ladybird in Australian English. I don't believe that there's anything wrong with using Commonwealth English to exclude Canadian English. Sure, nobody's doubting the Canada is part of the Commonwealth but if the term Commonwealth English is to be useful at all, then it would best be defined to exclude Canadian English. Unless we only wish to talk about spelling ... in which case why not use another term, Commonwealth spelling, and define it to include Canadian spelling. Jimp 27Jan06

And just how did all of these English speaking nations end up with the English language? Which nation championed research into the natural world? Where was Darwin born?

Any deviation from UK English is a compromise and will result in poor understanding of a subject by introducing mutiple descriptives.

It is a dissrespect to the British nation to just ignore our contribution too language and natural history. We have a good reason too use Lady Bird, an historical reason. Bug in real English referes too annoy or a listening device and not any creatures. We use the word Insect as the Americans use bug. We also use the word Beetle in many descriptions but this is suspended with Ladybird for a good reason. Ladybirds are one of the first contacts of the insect world for a child learning about life. This child also encounters harmful insects like Bees and Wasps or dirty insects like Flies and Cockroaches. The term Ladybird is soft and gentle in its connotations and for a child it inspires a safe curiosity. It empowers the child too investigate something that it normally would be encouraged too leave alone. For a country that is only a few hundered years old the American view that its version of a older language is correct is another indication of its general arrogance. And Colour is spelled COLOUR! 81.152.156.132 03:22, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

After careful consideration of the current state of the world, I have to admit that Americans are of a higher quality than a person of my caliber. I regret my comments I've previously made and hope that someday the greatest country in the world, the United States, will welcome me with open arms instead of ridiculing me for the mangled state of my choppers. Cheers, mate! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.49.212.10 (talk • contribs) 14:49, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Why are people whining about who's version of English is better? All languages are constantly in development so using age as a sign of being more or less correct is absurd! The original comment in this section was a simple question of using the label "commonwealth" and excluding Canada, without stating it in the article... Answer the question, solve the problem, and move on. There's no need to get into a "I'm better than you" squabble. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.11.90.69 (talk • contribs) 00:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

It's quite sad that in this thread - a discussion about the English language - none of the unregistered contributors are able to spell! :P EuroSong ^talk 10:46, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

First of all, I have seen this complaint by the British about the so-called arrogance of the Americans with their adaptations of the English language. We do not believe that our version of the English language is correct. We believe our version of the English language to be correct for America. That is why it is called American English as opposed to British English. Enough with the elitism already! You come off as bad as the Harvard snobs.

That being said, is their any rule against a title such as "Ladybird/Ladybug"? Oh, and bugs are not always considered in a negative light in America. For example the expression: Cute as a bug’s ear. Rod Lockwood 12:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I suspect the gent complaining about American English had his tongue firmly in his cheek. (Another one for your list, pal: they don't understand irony.) ;-) Pollythewasp (talk) 11:56, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Subtaxa

Should the Subtaxa go on a spearte page? They rather dominate this one. Andy Mabbett 11:38, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

You pushed me over the edge. :-) Done. Stan 16:02, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

More please...

Any clues on predators etc.? --JiMternet 10:43, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

How about lifespan? How long do they live? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.60.22.24 (talk • contribs) 20:00, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I recall an exceptionally hot summer, which also featured thousands and thousands of ladybugs. They would literally cover entire plants. Due to the heat, there was either a lack of food or water for them (or both), and they would bite humans. The little bastards could actually bite pretty hard. Any data on stuff like this?

Standardisation...

Perhaps it might be appropriate to standardise the name used throughout the article? Currently, the choice of whether to use the name 'ladybird', 'ladybug', etc. seems to fall in line with the nationality of those writing any particular section. I am thinking 'Ladybird' might be the most appropriate name to use, being the title of the page that all alternatives redirect to and all. Thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.64.43.157 (talk • contribs) 21:39, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree, it's confusing as is. I prefer Ladybug myself, however, doing a quick google search:

• Ladybird: 992,000
• Ladybug: 803,000

Since ladybird is about %20 more popular, I vote that ladybird should be the language in the article with a bolded mention of the term ladybug in the first or second sentance. --Quasipalm 14:19, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

It's actually more like:

• Ladybird: 4,000,000
• Ladybug: 7,000,000

--208.255.229.66 23:07, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Coleopterists seem to have adopted the judicious compromise of "lady beetle", which also has the advantage of adding "beetle" into the name, and dropping the misleading "bird" or "bug"; this would be an instance where bending the "most common" rule would be helpful. Google differences of only 20% amount to a dead tie, because it is so easily skewed by web page mirrors and such (not least of which is mirrors of our own content!). Stan 16:31, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

"Ladybird" is common in the UK; "ladybug" is common in the US. So you can't satisfy everybody. If "lady beetle" is an unacceptable compromise, how about the Latinate "coccinellid"? Gdr 18:13:57, 2005-08-13 (UTC)

I'd prefer "lady beetle", because it at least suggests ladybird/ladybug to the un-Latined. Stan 18:27, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

I know I'm a little late on this but I really think we should change the title and article convention to Lady beetle. It's the most scientific, non-partisan and descriptive. It would be great if we could always refer to the beetles as lady beetles in the text of the article. In addition, almost all of the other species with articles are named lady beetles. -- Rmrfstar 22:22, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

I find the american usage of the word 'BUG' to describe any insect very misleading. Bug suggests irritate or nasty insect.

Seems like a silly argument considering you call this insect a bird.  ;-) --Quasipalm 16:18, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Ha ha ha^ ... how true, Quasipalm. I also think the anon editor above you misunderstands the American usage of the term "bug". It's not just for nasty insects, but for anything from aphids to ants to grasshoppers. In fact, it's less used for nasty insects; most Americans wouldn't call wasps, bees, mosquitos, or centipedes "bugs", but would use their actual names instead. The dangerous ones have earned themselves more specific identifications. Anything simply called a "bug" is usually relatively harmless and tolerated (or even enjoyed, like ladybugs or pillbugs).

Anyway, I'd like to cast my vote for changing the title to "lady beetle" as well. It seems to be the most accurate and scientific. Kafziel 15:00, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd vote for a move to Lady beetle: a fair, scientific & comprehensible compromise. I'd be against moving it to Ladybug: this would be against Wikipedia's Style Guide. Whether or not the article is moved I'd agree that terminology must be kept consistant throughout the article: firstly for good writing style and secondly, more importantly, so as not to have people think that we're talking about two different beetles. Jimp 27Jan06

Even if 'most scientists' prefer 'lady beetle' (and I am not sure this has been proved), this shouldn't mean that the article title should change. Naturalists aren't in a position to influence the use of the English language to that extent. DavidFarmbrough 12:47, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

To US readers, the title doesn't make any sense - many if not most would think it was some kind of exotic bird. Brits often complain about WP's US-centrism, it shouldn't be any more OK to have it be Brit-biased. We also have precedent for choosing scientist-favored terms, sea star for example. Stan 14:15, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Aren't you being a bit dramatic? I'm a US reader, and when I came upon this page, I read the first sentence, which clears everything up. Ladybirds (Commonwealth English), also known as ladybugs (North American English) or lady beetles (most scientists prefer this name), are a family (Coccinellidae – "little sphere") of beetles. Problem solved. Sometimes using scientific names makes sense -- but in this case I think either ladybird or ladybug is better because these are used by the majority of english speakers -- not lady beatle. And I think that US-centric articles are more common than UK-centric articles, (See:Gasoline not Petrol), so I'm happy to see this one use the UK name. -Quasipalm 16:07, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

The vague consensus seems to be change the title of this article to "Lady beetle", but it still hasn't happened. Currently the article is titled "Coccinellidae". —Pengo 05:45, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't "Lady Beetle" be the most fitting name, considering the article puts forth that as the prefered use of scientists? As far as the article says, there is no nationality issue with the use of "Lady Beetle" either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.11.90.69 (talk • contribs) 00:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that it isn't common usage among the non-scientific populace. Normal American people call them "ladybugs", and normal British people call them "ladybirds". No-one outside the technical community calls them "lady beetles" (or not many, anyway) [and it would be in lower case, for several reasons]. Wikipedia does not record what things should be called, merely what they are called. --Stemonitis 10:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

ladybugs aren't birds. 71.236.105.175 17:12, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Hate to muddy the waters, but I'm English, and I'd have known what a ladybug was, so I'd have said that was the way forward. No point in being nationalistic about such a thing. Pollythewasp (talk) 11:59, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Just to muddy the waters a little more, I'm Australian & a lot of people here seem to refer to them as "Lady Beetles". Swampy 58.165.181.8 (talk) 08:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

A citation is needed in the article for the claim that scientists prefer to call these things "lady beetles" or "ladybird beetles". The argument that they're not bugs or birds is absurd, since, as you may have noticed, they're not ladies, either! (And about half of them aren't even female.) Dricherby (talk) 17:51, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Photograph

I've got a photograph of a ladybird I took in Panama. See User:DirkvdM/Photographs#Plants_and_Animals. I see there are already lots of photographs here. So if someone could tell me what ladybird it is I could place it in the right article. Thanx. DirkvdM 10:00, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

I have added a very fine detail version of the pupation Ladybird_Pupate.jpg I also have a similar picture of larval stage, if requested I will add it. Planktune 09:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

taxobox pic

Is there any reason why we are using this particular image in the taxobox; it isn't as clear or as intriguing as the second one. Could we possibly swap them? -- Rmrfstar 21:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Good job. I'm wondering if we really need 8 images of ladybugs... Wouldn't 2 or 3 be enough? --Quasipalm 06:28, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't like Image:Ladybird-on-wall.JPG but I think the others are educational enough. There are a bunch of good ones on the Commons, shall we copy the free ones to there and make a link to the gallery (saving the best for here)? -- Rmrfstar 22:10, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

good luck

No one has mentioned the fact that ladybirds bring good luck. Or is this just an English thing?

- Sorry. I just found the answer to my question. I missed the bit in the main article saying that in Italy, if a Ladybird flies into your bedroom, it is considered good luck. - douga6

Why did you not quote the rhyme? "Ladybird, ladybird, fly away. Please come back another day" or something like that. Planktune 09:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

-- The version I heard was: "Ladybird, ladybird fly away home... your house is on fire, your children are gone.." According to the BBC, one theory on the origin of the nursery rhyme is that, before burning their crops at harvest time, medieval farmers used to scare ladybirds away so as to protect them. - douga6

Planktune, you're conflating two rhymes. The other one is

Rain, rain,

Go away;

Come again,

Another day.

Jimp 30Jan06

Good luck? Ladybugs have been using my apartment as a haven from the winter cold for about four years now. Every year they show up by the dozens, three or four at a time, and kill themselves by flying into my hallogen light and setting themselves on fire. This year the hallogen is gone but they instead habitually fly into my heating unit in the middle of the night and I'm awakened by the shrill cry of my smoke detector and the acrid stench of singed beetle. It's completely unpleasant and I'm losing a great deal of sleep. Lack of sleep lowers my immunity to sickness, so I've been sick three times already this winter. If that's what you call good luck, I'd hate to have the bad kind. - Sam in Washington DC

That's not, strictly speaking, 'luck' though, huh? More a pest infestation. Pollythewasp (talk) 12:01, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Spelling

The current version of the article seems to have a mix of Commonwealth and American English. Wikipedia's manual of style has this to say.

• Each article should have uniform spelling and not a haphazard mix of different spellings, which can be jarring to the reader. For example, do not use center in one place and centre in another in the same article (except in quotations or for comparison purposes).
• If an article is predominantly written in one type of English, aim to conform to that type rather than provoking conflict by changing to another.
• If all else fails, consider following the spelling style preferred by the first major contributor (that is, not a stub) to the article.

Which predominates? Hard to say. There are more "-or"s than "-our"s but that's only because "color" appears more times than "favourite". There are no "-ise"s only "-ize"s but "-ize" is acceptable in Commonwealth English. On the other hand, the article is entitled Ladybird (at least for the present) and this is the term used throughout. It seems to me that perhaps the scales tip in favo(u)r of Commonwealth English.

What was preferred by the "the first major contributor (that is, not a stub) to the article"? Was there any such person? I've looked through the history and haven't found him or her. Rather it seems that the article has just grown bit by bit since it was first created by Karen Johnson. Unless I'm mistaken I suggest we stick with her style thus revert back to "-ise"s and throw some "u"s into the "color"s. Jimp 30Jan06

If we're going to change it to American English, we sure as hell can't keep "ladybird." I've never even heard anyone use that term in my entire life- the picture of the "ladybird" is even labelled "ladybug!" Dan 04:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Who the hell calls it a ladybird? It's a bug, thus ladybug. Someone needs to change the title and edit this dang thing. -Alex, 12.203.168.7 00:45, 26 March 2006 (UTC).

People in the UK call it a ladybird. -Quasipalm 17:18, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

It's not a bug; it's a beetle. Nickrz 22:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC) That taxobox image sucks - need to change it. I suggest Nickrz 22:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

The case law is pretty clear on these points. Although never explicitly marked as a stub, at least by May 2003 ([1]) the article was well beyond a stub length, and includes one clear "-ise" spelling. On that basis, we should now stick to Commonwealth English spelling. As to the title, if there isn't a single acceptable global name (i.e. if we can't agree on "ladybird", "ladybug" or "lady beetle" (and I won't agree to any but the first!)), then we'd have to move it to the scientific name Coccinellidae, which would seem reasonable in this case. I'm happy with it as it is, but if someone wants to instigate a move to Coccinellidae, by all means go ahead. Moving it to American English is not a viable option.

As to the picture, if you really think the other one is better, then nothing is stopping you from changing it, although, as it happens, I prefer the existing one. --Stemonitis 15:40, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

It's just that picture shows no diagnostic characteristics, being from that odd angle. I don't want to look like I'm tooting my own horn, though.Nickrz 19:08, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah - I think all the common names should redirect to the Family name. Common names are notoriously unreliable, arbitrary, and subjective. They should all be subordinate to the accepted taxonomic binomial. I don't know how to make these changes yet, else I would.Nickrz 19:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I have been bold and moved the article to Coccinellidae, and changed the text to match. I think this is probably uncontroversial, since different nationalities are equally fixed in their terminology. My only worry is that the article might now be a bit too technical, constantly referring to "coccinellids", but I dare say that can be softened over time. --Stemonitis 07:08, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

No, this is worse than any of the English-language alternatives. Even coleopterists use "lady beetle". Stan 14:33, 29 March 2006 (UTC)javascript:insertTags('--Kerowyn 23:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)',,);

Yes, but lay people say "ladybird" or "ladybug", so there's no general agreement. WP:TOL states "…when common names are well-known and reasonably unique, they should be used for article titles. Scientific names should be used otherwise"; in this case, the names are not reasonably unique (there are three), so the common name cannot be used. Thus, Coccinellidae. --Stemonitis 14:39, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

A good change, in my opinion. Gdr 19:40, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I prefer Lady Beetle above all other versions. I guess the question is, if two English speaking coleopterists held a meeting in Japan, would they call it a Lady Beetle, or a Coccinellidae? -Quasipalm 21:07, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Well then gee, I guess Asian lady beetle, Thirteen-spotted lady beetle, Convergent lady beetle, Two-spotted lady beetle, not to mention the rest of the "beetle" names in Category:Beetles all need to be changed. (What's especially amusing about Thirteen-spotted lady beetle is that some "Gdr" guy wrote in favor of "lady beetle", even though by the arguments given above, it should be the least common name.) Stan 22:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm not always consistent. Gdr 23:27, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Lady beetle is a widely used scientific name for lady bugs/beetles/birds. Coccinellidae is the worst option of all - even the scientific community rarely uses it. There are, in fact, more then 200 times less search results for "Coccinellidae" then for "ladybug", and 100 times less then for "lady beetle". Come on, when is the last time you called a dog Canis lupus familiaris? This is just silly. Matveims 00:12, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

You could also use the historically older form of the two names which should be verifiable through the Oxford English Dictionary which gives the dates that words first appear. Rod Lockwood 12:28, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

The correct name is 'Ladybird beetle' - that applies in the US as well as Britain. 'Ladybug' is US slang and although it is in common use it's incorrect.

Spot numbers

Isn't there some nursey rhyme or children's story that gives meanings to the different number of spots? I remember when I was a kid we thought that an even number of spots meant it was a girl and an odd number of spots meant it was a boy. (Or vice versa). Kerowyn 23:41, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

When I was a kid, we thought the number of spots was its age in years. --BennyD 19:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't remember it being in a nursery rhyme but I remember hearing both when I was a kid. But I can't (even back then) see them growing new spots each year, but maybe they do. Anyone else heard either story, or can confirm one of them? Tydamann (talk) 10:11, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The article currently acknowledges the myth that spots are an indicator of age and says that the myth is true. However, it cites a page that says the myth is false. Francomophone (talk) 05:23, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Identification

Coccinellidae?

Could someone tell me if this beetle is a Coccinellidae? I looks like it (overall shape) but lacks the spots... IronChris | (talk) 12:40, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Dyanega has informed me on the talk page of WikiProject Arthropods that it is a Chrysomelidae - Subfamily Chrysomelinae - Genus Calligrapha. IronChris | (talk) 13:40, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

hey

anybody want to chat?

I found a brown ladybird with white spots in my house just now. I've never seen one like that before. 84.70.253.79 18:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Right now there is a ladybug on my British Columbian flag in my window...I shook the flag to get it off and it refused to move, I hit it with a pen and it refused to move, why would it not move when I poked it, mot bugs would either try to bite the pen or move away.

That could well be Calvia quattuordecimguttata, the cream-spot ladybird, based on your United Kingdom IP - a species for which have no article yet. --Stemonitis 08:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Long-Range Weather Forecast section is useless

This is a description of original research, and without any citation. It therefore seems subjective and is not verifiable.

Coccinellidaes as Pests

There should be a section on how Coccinellidaes are quickly being considered to be "pests" because they sometimes enter houses during the winter for warmth, especially the Asian ladybug. Vamooom 21:32, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

I added such a section, with a link to Asian lady beetle, which already has a full discussion of this species as a household pest. (Are there other pest species?) Their status as a pest in North America is significant enough that a section heading is justified, I think; I know I myself came to this article a while ago to see if there was information on lady beetles as pests. On a related note, the statement in the article introduction that lady beetles are "harmless to humans" and considered "cute" by most people is no longer true for many of us who have to deal with hundreds or thousands of them indoors--so I've added a {{fixpov}} tag there. --David Sewell 15:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

One thing that has been left out of the reason for the Asian lady beetles to be considered pests. They are more agressive—they bite! I suppose there will need to be a citation, but I know this from personal experience. Rod Lockwood 12:20, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

"The last word" article in Feb 2-8,2008 issue of NewScientist has an anecdotal reference that also indicates the ladybird insect will bite humans. A quick Google search yields several credible references to the Ladybug's ability to bite humans. The bite is non-venomous and considered very mild compared to other biting and stinging insects. Dave Moore 207.203.88.15 (talk) 12:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Life Cycle

"The entire life cycle of the Coccinellid is only 4-7 weeks". But, apparently, they hibernate through winter. So how long does a ladybird live? Stephenjh 11:33, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Larvae Cannibalism

I've seen the third instar larvae feed on its brethren who have just attached themselves to the wall to pupate. The attached ones quickly undergo some changes that makes them lethargic and easy targets for the still-motile and presumably hungry larvae, especially since they can't move from the spot. Often the attacker is of smaller size, not yet grown enough and obviously hungey. The victim can sometimes put up a fight but the gruesome result is always the same. Something should be written about this activity. I've seen it year after year on the side of the building where I worked in Carrollton, TX. The insects are the same as appear on the right hand side of the main article there. 208.190.133.203 (talk) 21:03, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

RE:Advertisement Section

Why? It seems to me to be a totally pointless, irrelevant entry in an otherwise good article. Stephenjh 13:26, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Misinformation ?

Is the Habitat section accurate?

"Coccinellids are beneficial to gardeners in general. In the Spring, you'd usually find a ladybug in a vegetable garden feeding on aphids. Just like bears, ladybugs hybernate during the winter. They gather into groups and move to higher land, such as a mountain. That's why ladybugs are not seen as often in the winter. Ladybugs and other coccinellids are found usually next to where aphids are, and they only lay eggs near aphids, too. The reason for this is so they don't have to travel too far to get food."

Bears, misspelled hibernate, mountains? If it is accurate then it should be backed by a reference. To my untrained eye it reads like a subtle twisting of the truth, with someone experimenting to see how long a half truth will stay in an article. Can anyone with better knowledge than me make a call on this one? The paragraph in question was added by an anonymous editor in this [2] edit. The anonymous editor has made only two contributiosn to wikipedia, both to this article [3]. The other edit was a change of format to a heading. If the editor is genuine I would have thought that there would be more useful edits in the ensuing two weeks. John Dalton 22:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Killer Coccinellidae?

I never knew that female ladybirds had a tendency to kill off the males (by infecting them). See http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk:80/pages/live/articles/technology/technology.html?in_article_id=434078&in_page_id=1965

Is this well known? douga6 16:52, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Ladybug Poem

Wish I still had my gardening books. Although I saw this on one of the nature programs from PBS. The first part of the poem refers to ladybugs laying their eggs on nettles. As your skin will burn when you brush against the nettles. Some old gardening books recommend growing nettles in an out-of-the-way patch in your garden. (Also a patch of burdock so that you can use the leaves to remove the stinging hairs which lodge in your skin just in case.) Does anyone remember the series? This sort of contradicts the part about the ladybugs laying the eggs near a food source, but as I recall this is where they were supposed to obtain their toxicity. The way the monarch butterflies become poisonous from the catepillars eating the poisonous milkweed plants. Rod Lockwood 12:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

You mention PBS. I'm surprised the article doesn't mention the counting song from Seseme Street, "The Ladybug Picnic". Twelve ladybugs.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6827227586024366621&ei=vKCtSM71IJzwrAKXj8S5Ag&q=ladybug+picnic&vt=lf&hl=en —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.79.154.82 (talk) 17:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

There's also a Romanian song for when a ladybug lands on you and you pick it in your hand, raising it towards the sun. It goes: "Gargarita-rita/Zboara-n poienita/Unde vei zbura/Acolo-i casa ta" or "Acolo m-oi marita" ("Ladybugy-lady/Fly into the meadow/Wherever you may go/There's your home sweet home" or "There I shall be wed". This second version of the last verse is sung by girls in the hope of the ladybug landing on some handsome lad or at least show them the direction in which to look for him. There's also the belief that if the ladybug doesn't fly upwards and away from you but rather lands on the ground nearby, it's not a good sign. When I was a child I used to focus on the ladybug's direction and identify also the cardinal point to which it flew. I'm not sure it's a popular practice or just me and my sister's way of learning orientation. All these are from Romania, as I am. Alexandra —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.104.186.115 (talk) 22:21, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

what is the mrs gren of lady birds

hey guys just wanting to know if you know the mrs gren of science of ladybirds?? thanks

Name

Would anyone support a move request to lady beetle? I think that it goes with WP:USEENGLISH and compromises the BrE and AmE bickering as fixed-wing aircraft and filling station do. Reginmund 22:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Given that this group has at least three well-known common names, and dozens of dialectical variants, the ONLY name that is universally recognized and completely unambiguous is the scientific name for the group. Given that it is indeed a taxonomic page (that is, a page with a taxobox), there is more than enough justification to stick with the taxonomic name, even if there were no bickering over which version of "English" to use. Scientific names are, I think, better as a compromise position in this and other similar cases, given that even people who don't speak English will be able to find the entry. Also, consider this: if you were to move the page now, there would be a VERY LARGE NUMBER of redirects that would need to be altered, since "lady beetle" is the LEAST used of the three common variants. It is unnecessary, and would involve a lot of effort - I see no "up side" to making such a move. Dyanega 22:39, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Support. Any name (Ladybird, Ladybug, Ladybird beetle, Lady beetle) is better than Coccinellidae. With a common name, even people who don't speak New Latin will understand the title. Narayanese 12:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Color precisions

The line "A very large number of species are mostly or entirely black, gray, or brown, however..." needs to be sourced and would ideally have a numeric value (are we talking about 10%? 99,9%?). Faltenin 14:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

No one knows what color all the species are; many are known only from the original description, and no one person has read all of these descriptions or seen all of the specimens. Furthermore, if there are still 3,000 undiscovered species out there, it would be pretty silly to give a percentage when it could turn out that most of the undescribed ones are tiny and black (as seems likely, actually). Any statement would be a wild guess, and saying a large number is accurate enough - there are several hundred species that "are mostly or entirely black, gray, or brown" - and that's a very large number. Dyanega 16:59, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

The Irish name

First an anecdote: I know an Irish lady who lives in the Netherlands. She told me that she liked the Dutch name of the Ladybird 'lieveheersbeestje', which means: good Lord's animal. At that time I did not yet know that a French name is 'bete à bon Dieu' (means the same) and that the Irish name is 'bóín Dé'. The latter appears to be a corruption of the French name.

However, this article says that 'bóín Dé' means 'God's little cow'. Yes, I never thought of that. And after all, a beetle is not a cow, but it isn't a bird either.

But, with my very limited knowledge of the Irish language, I find that bóín Dé is feminine, while I'd expect any diminutive to be masculine. So, does it mean 'little cow' after all? HandigeHarry (talk) 21:40, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

And the Hebrew name means "Moses our rabbi beetle". Hipushit moshe-rabenu.--217.132.129.166 (talk) 19:46, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

I'm sure that in the "Coccinellids as household pests" section, the following bit is vandalism, but I'm not sure if just removing Colin would make it correct! Are they commonly found in houses? Ladybugs can commonly be found in Colin's house, because that is their prime mating habitat. Also, how are ladybirds related to Ohio? Why is the article part of Wikiproject Ohio?Snorgle (talk) 14:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, so I removed the whole sentence about Colin's house (sorry Colin!), and apparently the ladybird is the state insect of Ohio. Seems a bit flimsy, but Ohians can make that call.Snorgle (talk) 16:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

does anyone know how to get rid of the ladybugs? we have a serious infestation in our flat and suck them into the hoover, but i don't like killing things and would rather ward them off in some way - they also bite and i have become quite allergic to them, any help would be appreciated. ---- amber

Someone typed in all caps "LADYBUGS ARE MEN MEN MEN MEN" and so on just below the gallery, and I cannot find a way to remove the vandalizing text. Somebody please help, this is completely uncalled-for. 09:00, 11 April 2008 (UTC) White Mage Cid

Green ladybugs are poisonous?

I think it's just an urban legend started by kids who rarely saw any except the red ones and wanted to scare their younger siblings. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.60.86 (talk) 02:30, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

lady bugs

What group are they in? (Example: Butterflies are in the Lepidoptera Group)--64.203.131.116 (talk) 00:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)Bold text Mackenzie kanney--64.203.131.116 (talk) 00:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Ladycows

{{editsemiprotected}} I live in the north of England and everyone here calls these Ladycows. I would like to see this acknowledged in the article

Hmm, me too, never heard that. Got a source?--Jac16888 (talk) 00:38, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

 Done I'm adding some other alternate names I found, as well.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 06:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

---

temperature???

WOW! for beginners it was a bit strange to see my name on Wikipedia! I'm also Karen Johnson, just a cool side bit. Can anyone tell me the temperature we can keep our ladybugs in the fridge? We got 3 canning jars full and I don't care if they are bugs, I do not want them to be uncomfortable. They went from dormant? to fridge last night, is this cool? literally. I think they were dormant anyhow, they were moving a bit, but they were at the base of the trees, in the dark, cool woods. me and mine are debating rather they were dormant or not. My guy wants to use them on the plants of course, I want to make sure they are not uncomfortable while waiting to go to work. thanks ~crazymightquit —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazymightquit (talk • contribs) 18:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

....you put ladybirds in your fridge...? Lu-igi board (talk) 20:39, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Ladybug vs. Ladybird

As per Wikipedia's naming conventions, I did a search engine test of the two most common terms conventionally used for this specific 'fauna'. Here are the results:

Ladybug - 5,730,000
(search: (ladybug) -site:wikipedia.org : 4,550,000)
(search: ("lady bug") -site:wikipedia.org : 1,180,000)

Ladybird - 4,660,000
(search: (ladybird) -site:wikipedia.org : 3,410,000)
(search: ("lady bird") -site:wikipedia.org : 1,250,000)

'Ladybird' is terribly misleading to folks who are not raised with it a part of their dialect. On the other hand, 'Ladybug', though technically still a misnomer, is a great deal more accurate in describing the article's subject. But more important, it is the prevalent terminology in use.

I figured I should post this in discussion to allow for input from other editors before changing the terms in the article. I'll check back in a couple days to see if there are any arguments that provide compelling evidence against the alteration and go from there.
-K10wnsta (talk) 05:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Not really a very good "test" for an international article, considering the enormous population of the USA any "American English" terminology would nearly always trump "British English" terminology if a search engine test is used. I suggest one vote per country, I'm Australian & just to throw a spanner in the works I vote "Lady Beetle" ;-) Swampy 58.165.181.8 (talk) 08:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea to base this on most common use per country instead of search results and population. I'm Irish and as far as i'm aware a majority of Irish and northern Irish use Ladybird —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gabbyyellow (talk • contribs) 14:38, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

All absolutely fascinating I'm sure but the article is called "Coccinellidae" - so what's the problem? Richerman (talk) 01:24, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

This is, in fact, WHY the article title is Coccinellidae; to avoid the sort of linguistic "turf war" outlined above. The basic rule in Wikipedia is that if an organism is known by multiple common names, all well-known, then NONE of them is used for the associated article, but the scientific name is used instead. This comes up quite often here and elsewhere. Dyanega (talk) 19:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Exactly, I'm completely mystified as to what this "vote" is all about. There's a redirect page for each of the names mentioned above and the different names are explained in the lead so there is no need to change them and no consensus to do so. Oh, and we don't vote on wikipedia either. Richerman (talk) 00:32, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

In popular culture

I've removed a load of trivia from this section in line with wp:trivia as it was just a collection of unrelated "facts" that adds nothing to the article, and a lot of it wasn't even about the subject anyway. For intance, there was a TV programme about women called "Ladybirds" and group of female singers that called themselves "Ladybirds". What has that got to do with Coccinellidae? Also the fact that there was a ladybird character in a cartoon and one in a computer game is completely irrelevant and frankly, uninteresting. I'm not sure that any of the stuff about logos is really of much interest either - but at least some of it is referenced. Richerman (talk) 01:43, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Please rename this article

i want this article renamed to ladybug —Preceding unsigned comment added by WindowsSeven (talk • contribs) 23:42, 3 August 2010 (UTC)