Talk:Comparison of butterflies and moths

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

Lepidoptera Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lepidoptera, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of butterflies and moths 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.LepidopteraWikipedia:WikiProject LepidopteraTemplate:WikiProject LepidopteraLepidoptera articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

/Archive 1

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): SamFeinberg.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Differences between butterflies and moths's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "scoble":

• From Arctiidae: Scoble, MJ. (1995) The Lepidoptera: Form, Function and Diversity. Second ed. Oxford University Press.
• From Lepidoptera: Scoble, MJ 1995. The Lepidoptera: form, function and diversity. Oxford, UK: The Oxford University Press; 404 p.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 04:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm posting this here because Heterocera redirects to this article. According to [1], Heterocera is a "formerly recognized suborder of Lepidoptera" - this means that:

1. Moth has an incorrect infobox, where the unranked Heterocera should be correctly classified as a suborder (see next point); also note that other sites refer to it as a suborder.
2. Because it is referred to as "formerly recognized", the suborder Heterocera has controversy/history that should be addressed by its own article, or this article because Heterocera redirects here. This history should be addressed to clarify its current status (as a possibly "unranked" taxonomic rank).

--Notmyhandle (talk) 04:07, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am by no means an expert, but is it safe enough to assume that the phrase "true butterfiles" (in parentheses after the link to "Papilionoidea") in the first paragraph is a typo? Brettpeirce (talk) 13:39, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The long standing (since 2004) examples of butterflies vs moths were poor quality, after a long search for clean, representative examples I have added a couple which I think illustrate the extremes as described in the article. I will look for a few more illustrations of other points in the article. --Tony Wills (talk) 07:41, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It can be read in the "Pupae" section, "For example, the Hawk moths form an exposed chrysalis" By definition, moths do not form chrysalides/chrysalises. However, this is based on information stated in the "Pupa" wiki article, as follows in the "Chrysalis" section, "It is important to differentiate between pupa, chrysalis and cocoon. The pupa is the stage between the larva and adult stages. The chrysalis is a butterfly pupa. A cocoon is a silk case that moths, and sometimes other insects, spin around the pupa." Atreyiu (talk) 01:04, 27 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atreyiu (talk • contribs) 00:47, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Comparison of butterflies and moths. 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/20130209164014/http://www4.lu.se/upload/GreinerThesis.pdf to http://www4.lu.se/upload/GreinerThesis.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) 16:51, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone,

I was thinking that we should add in some examples of butterflies to this section. Using the Cabbage White Butterfly^[1] makes sense because it is mentioned earlier in the entry. It is important for people to realize that moths and butterflies can both share characteristics with the other. Thanks, SamFeinberg (talk) 00:28, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]