Talk:Porpita prunella

Animals Low‑importance

Porpita prunella is within the scope of WikiProject Animals, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to animals and zoology. For more information, visit the project page.AnimalsWikipedia:WikiProject AnimalsTemplate:WikiProject Animalsanimal articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Animals To-do:

Here are some Open Tasks :

Copyedit:
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Improve: Photoperiodism, Tool use by non-human animals, Omnivore, Animal suicide, Sphaerium beckmani (a species in family Sphaeriidae),
Requests:
- Mammals:
- Invertebrates: Campocraspedon
- Fishes: Zaniolepis frenata
Merge: GLAM/ARKive donated texts into articles about endangered species.
Expand: Junqueira cow, Atka mackerel
Nominate and vote: Science collaboration of the month, Article Improvement Drive, WikiProject Animals Collaboration

Marine life Low‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Marine life, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource on marine life. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. This project is an offshoot of the WikiProject Tree of Life.Marine lifeWikipedia:WikiProject Marine lifeTemplate:WikiProject Marine lifeMarine life articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Marine life To do:

Have a look at the Marine life WikiProject and sign up.

Here are some tasks you can do, as organized by The Marine life Wikiproject:

Collaboration of the week: Marine life article assessment
Other: See the projects page
Images: Upload any non-copyrighted marine life images to Wikimedia Commons
Featured Articles/Good Articles:
Other: Add {{Portal|Marine life}} to related articles

Good effort![edit]

Without any expertise in biology, my opinion is that your additions have improved the article. I have only done a minimal check on the sources you cite, so it would be good to have a more thorough review to verify the sources support the claims made in the article. If you are ready for more in-depth review of the scientific content, then please do follow the advice of ColinFine to place {{subst:submit}} at the top of the article.

Another pointer: the lead paragraph should summarize content in the rest of the article, like an executive summary. In my opinion, the info about whether it exists should probably be in the body of the content rather than the lead. Whatever is written in the lead takes on additional importance, which may be misplaced in this case.

You can also participate in Biology-related discussions and ask for editing help or an assessment of article quality at the Biology Project's talk page.

Cheers! — Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 22:33, 15 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]