Talk:Dragonfly
From Academic Kids
Too bad I haven't gotten a picture yet that shows the wings, the head, the body, and the legs all in the same picture (I'd take one of these two down, so as to unclutter the article).
Maybe I should sharpen the tail of the lower one in Photoshop or something, and remove the top picture? --KQ 17:43 Aug 24, 2002 (PDT)
Opps! Looks like there is a second suborder, the zygoptera. I will input them now. --mav
Opps again. Suborder. Grumble. --mav
KQ
Other than the HTML issues (which you already fixed), the major problem with this table is that dragonflies are a suborder and you were using the order table. Now there are duplicated family lists both here and at Odonata. As a general rule I don't like articles on sub-orders becuase they lead to messes like this. But since dragonflies and damselflies are sufficiently differentiated in the average person's mind, I see little reason for doing the strictly logical thing (that is a merge of the two suborders into Odonata). Perhaps it would be best to not have family lists at Odonata and only have direct links here.... --mav
- Hm, ok. You're talking over my head; I'm not very strong in biology. :-) Take whatever action you think is best--except I'd very much like not to merge this one with the article at Odonata, simply because people do recognize a dragonfly on sight. Was your proposal to move or shorten the table or to move the article itself? --KQ
I would certainly concur that merging is not a good idea. However, it seems overly redundant to include in this article on dragonflies, various facts on damselflies, given that damselflies have their own article and the Odonata article exists for compare/contrast information. - Marshman 18:30, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
