Talk:Culicoides

Learn more about this page

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Insects Low‑importance

	Insects portal This 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.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Diptera Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Diptera, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of flies 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.DipteraWikipedia:WikiProject DipteraTemplate:WikiProject DipteraDiptera articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Merger proposal

Latest comment: 8 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

Hello. I think we should consider merging Culicoides annettae, Culicoides chaverrii, Culicoides cummingi and all the other Culicoides stubs into the main article, Culicoides. Since the individual stubs consist of barely a line of text each, it would be more practical for readers to find all the information centralised in just one article. What do you think?--Leptictidium (mt) 19:49, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Yes. Please do. The stubs provide next to nothing and the species names and distribution would better fit in a list or table in the Genus article. Velella ^{Velella Talk} 20:04, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

@FoCuSandLeArN:, creator of these articles, what do you think?--Leptictidium (mt) 21:25, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

I'm of the stream of thought that species deserve separate articles, however if little literature can be found on them, then sadly they ought to be merged. Cheers, FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 21:32, 8 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

By definition any species needs to have a scientific description - all of these insects will have them somewhere - these can be hard to find with google or google scholar, but they exist. Species are regarded by all as a pretty basic unit so I suspect there would not be a consensus to merge. Have you tried looking for information already? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

I will be adding species descriptions to some, as I always try to in general. Some are under paywall or unavailable, but the potential's always there! FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 21:54, 14 August 2016 (UTC)Reply

Add topic