Talk:Entomotoxicology

A request has been made for this article to be peer reviewed to receive a broader perspective on how it may be improved. Please make any edits you see fit to improve the quality of this article.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on 21 March 2008. Further details are available here.

Suggestion

Nice job on this artice, very well written and organized. I especially like how you guys provided more than just a couple examples of how cases were employed using this technique. Adding pictures would improve the overall look of the page, but you guys have done a good job on the article overall. Azayed34 (talk) 19:34, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good and unique topic. Very interesting. We had some trouble finding information and research for our topic too because it was also a new and upcoming aspect of forensic entomology. Good job though and well organized. -Lauren —Preceding unsigned comment added by Runwild2006 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a fascinating subject! The body of the article as it stands right now, however, is in three large chunks. For readability, you might want to break them up into smaller subsections. Good luck on the assignment! – Clockwork Soul 02:16, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was really intrigued by the topic of the article. It has been well-written. However, I feel that it could use some breaking down into smaller more compact sections. For instace, under the section about famous cases involving entomotoxicology, you could include subheadings or titles for every case. It would make it more organized. garza_j_e (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 18:15, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This subject is intriguing. You have done a really good job. I just wanted to recommend that you add some external links at the end for readers to find out more information on your topic. --Amandamartinez06 (talk) 07:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The material is interesting, and obviously, you guys have done your research. Just a couple of suggestions. Under 'Cases employing entomotoxicology,' you open with 'Beyer and partners' - with no previous mention of Beyer, I have no idea who he/she is. Perhaps give more background information about Beyer - or simply a first name. Also, some pictures would be a nice touch! Good luck! --Gdespejo (talk) 04:01, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good job on your page; it might be a little easier for other readers to understand the subject however, if less complicated words were used. Also, as the above comment stated, some pictures would be nice- maybe comparing the sizes of instars after they have fed on tissues contaminated with various drugs.. just an idea. Csb14 (talk) 15:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have a few suggestions for your article. On the second to last line of the first page is it supposed to say acid or acidic? Also under Effects of toxins on arthropods in the second paragraph first line…were found the increase the…maybe put to in place of the so that it makes more sense. Also in the third paragraph of the same section the third line down it says….of cocaine in the area being feed upon. I think you might have meant to put fed instead of feed. Thanks. --Jordanmurphy (talk) 00:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article looks great and is very informative. The only thing that I can see room for improvement is under the section "cases employing entomotoxicology". There's one huge chunk of paragraphs. Is there any way you could split them up with subtitles? I've come to notice that it's more appealing to readers. This way they know more specificly what they're going to spend five minutes reading than just "cases employing entomotoxicology". I hope that you will find this useful and helpful. Best of luck! Lindseyjean11 (talk) 03:41, 10 April 2008 (UTC) --lindseyjean[reply]

Article looks good. It's a little technical, but it's a technical topic, so that's expected. I took the liberty of linking "deionized" to the appropriate Wikipedia reference (deionized). Very informative article. Noromaru (talk) 03:24, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very well-written article with a great length. The only suggestion I can propose is possibly putting subheadings in the case study section. This would make this section more readable and could also make it look more wikipedia-esque. Great job! AMFaris (talk) 17:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article looks really good. Its length and details are great. Its very specific on sub-headings and elaboration which makes it clear and easy to read. Pictures, I don't know if there are any for this topic, but they should maybe be included. (Medillar (talk) 22:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC))[reply]