Talk:Report indicates Mexican monarch butterfly population at ten-year high, reasons unclear

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Headline[edit]

I like the new title. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:13, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It took much chewing over before I came up with it. Tough, to capture the focal event neatly while keeping the bid for an interesting headline. BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 23:30, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Busterflies[edit]

Articles about butterflies, besides this one:

--Pi zero (talk) 23:24, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering earlier about a butterfly category, or if we should roll it up into butterflies and moths (lepidoptera). BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 23:29, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Concur. But I must add sometimes category names can be counterintuitive. I realize they're meant for readers, but maybe a single-screen searchable list with no dropdowns or clickins would be helpful. It'd certainly be more efficient than guess-and-check. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:30, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Neither Special:Categories nor Special:CategoryTree are great, but they may help. The main way to find cats would be via redirects but not all cats are readily found that way, of course... BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 23:35, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The only moth articles I see are
--Pi zero (talk) 23:46, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Plus a linkable, but not categorisable, mention in Biologist Nick Bos tells Wikinews about 'self-medicating' ants BRS (Talk) (Contribs) 23:56, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I want to be able to go CTRL-F "endang" and find out if it's "Endangered species" or "Species endangerment" and find out while I'm there that "Endangered Species Act" is a category as well even though I hadn't thought to check. Darkfrog24 (talk) 00:58, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
<nods> Categorization is something we'd like to provide semi-automated assistance on; though we also want to arrangement things, consistently, such that semi-automation can feasibly be done without at need. --Pi zero (talk) 02:40, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review of revision 4461726 [Passed][edit]

Revision 4461726 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 02:24, 2 February 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Comments by reviewer: None added.

The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4461726 of this article has been reviewed by Pi zero (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 02:24, 2 February 2019 (UTC).[reply]

Comments by reviewer: None added.

The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikinews.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Report_indicates_Mexican_monarch_butterfly_population_at_ten-year_high,_reasons_unclear&oldid=4461736"