Talk:High brown fritillary
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
[edit]
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Iginsberg. Peer reviewers: Sjwang312, Z.kelley, Kaylaholthaus.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Importance rating
[edit]This is a UK Biodiversity Action Plan species—GRM 14:56, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on High brown fritillary. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081003102036/http://www.butterfly-conservation.org/uploads/Bracken%20for%20Butterflies.pdf to http://www.butterfly-conservation.org/uploads/Bracken%20for%20Butterflies.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:43, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi iginsburg, Some edits I think you could make are in the description, you could mention the specific name of the physical features. In the life cycle section, it may help to have more citations, as well as in the food resources section. In the future conservation efforts section, I made a few grammatical and punctuational edits. In the second to last sentence of that section I'm not sure what you meant by "winter bracken litter clearance". Maybe you could elaborate on that as well. Overall, great job, and good luck editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjwang312 (talk • contribs) 16:03, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
WashU Class
[edit]Hello everyone,
For a class I am currently taking I did extensive alterations on this article and updated sections and headings and information. I believe the article has been improved by my edits, or at least there is more information where there was not before.
Thanks! Iginsberg (talk) 03:57, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
- Hi! I added in a few more facts from the sources you listed and added a few references to those sources in your article.
Hello, I moved the taxobox toward the top of the page and unlinked it from the description section. I also added an additional picture showing the dorsal and ventral view of the butterfly next to the description. There is a lot of good info here and the sections are really helpful, but I noticed a lot of it wasn't cited. I added another cited source, and included some information from here in the "Habitat" section, but still most of the facts in the article aren't directly cited and I couldn't access all of the sources to try to add them. Also, it looks like two of the sources listed are the same article - Bracken for Butterflies- but I couldn't figure out how to remove the redundant citation. Good luck with any further edits! --Kaylaholthaus (talk) 02:29, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
- This is a great article! I would suggest adding to your lead section to make it more informative to further reflect the information in your article. Additionally, I would suggest moving the photo gallery to after the description section so that the images reflect what is written in that section. Keep up the good work! Meganav (talk) 11:47, 28 November 2017 (UTC)