Talk:Caccothryptus maculosus

Caccothryptus maculosus 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.
Review: October 31, 2026. (Reviewed version).

Beetles Low‑importance

	Insects portal Caccothryptus maculosus is within the scope of WikiProject Beetles, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to beetles. For more information, visit the project page.BeetlesWikipedia:WikiProject BeetlesTemplate:WikiProject Beetlesbeetle
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

GA review

Latest comment: 11 days ago5 comments2 people in discussion

Passed. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:24, 31 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Caccothryptus maculosus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 19:34, 31 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: Premeditated Chaos (talk · contribs) 23:16, 31 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

Para 2 doesn't match the lead which says identification was primarily based on genitals, here we have 4 characteristics listed and 2 are not about genitals
- Fixed.-G
I'd move the mention that C. maculosus is in that group into Para 2 rather than leaving it in para 3
- Moved that around.-G
" Its head is covered in fine, dense punctures" punctures? if that's a taxonomic term distinct from the common usage I'd gloss it
- Glossed.-G
Similarly you gloss pronotum but not setae or elytra
- Glossed.-G
"despite the species name" for clarity I would explicitly mention Laos here
- Done.-G
"and M. maculosus (Illegible" italics
- Fixed.-G

And again just to give myself something to do, checking all refs.

Hernando & Ribera 2005 both good
Hernando & Ribera 2014 all uses good
Matsumoto yes
Yoshitomi yes, from math - 34 existing and +3 in the paper

Just a few prose gripes. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:16, 31 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Premeditated Chaos: Thank you! Responded. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 23:22, 31 October 2026 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.