![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 |
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3255965/ Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 02:10, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Unknown parameter |coauthors=
ignored (|author=
suggested) (
help)Looks like there are now enough refs for a GA push. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 09:34, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
Are than any secondary medical sources that discuss it? Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 20:48, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Don't have time right now. Should do later.
{{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link) CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (
link){{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite journal}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
link){{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help){{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)-- Wesha ( talk) 20:17, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
I added a behavior section as part of Behavioral Ecology at Washington University in St. Louis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kaijones5245 ( talk • contribs) 02:58, 10 October 2013 (UTC) Kaijones5245 ( talk) 03:02, 10 October 2013 (UTC) kaijones5245
I edited this page minorly, with a couple word changes. I also have a suggestion in that I think you should provide more references throughout the Sperm Protection, egg Production and Alarm Pheromones sections. ~~Jeremy Davis~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by JSDavis2 ( talk • contribs) 20:43, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
I think it would be beneficial to add that the spermalege is a product of coadaptive evolution. It also might be beneficial to explain that bed bug females have fully functional genitals and birthing canal. Info about the evolution of traumatic insemination should be added explaining how it was a behavior meant to decrease sperm competition. The reproduction subsection of behavior should be consolidated with the reproduction subsection of physical description. Sperm and seminal fluid allocation and egg production subsections should be consolidated with the reproduction section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dudas 91 ( talk • contribs) 23:57, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Peer Review, Round 2
I think the information in the behavior section is detailed and concise, but it would be nice if the subtitles within the section were available in the contents at the top of the page. I noticed only "Reproduction" was visible there but I think the smaller headings should be added as well. I am not sure if you have come across a discussion of the evolution of these behaviors in the literature, but if you have it would be good to add a little bit about that.
Amruthapk ( talk) 02:18, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
I went through and added more links. There were also a few minor spelling errors I fixed. All and all, though, I think that this article is good and is potentially ready to be nominated for a good article. Rosemaryshanley ( talk) 22:59, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: FunkMonk ( talk · contribs) 06:58, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Reproduction is two separate bullet things??? Why? 76.14.24.117 ( talk) 01:10, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
The EL section is not a place for possible refs. Thus moving
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 13:29, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
There's no mention of permethrin and many other insecticides which can be used.
The article gives the impression it's pointless trying to eradicate the things. It isn't. Fletcherbrian ( talk) 03:38, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
Point taken. But the difficulty with eradication lies in part at least with the bugs hiding themselves so well which non-professionals can't handle. Fletcherbrian ( talk) 12:45, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
A picture caption says "A bed bug with hunger bubbles visible in its gut". There is no Wikipedia article hunger bubble and a Google search for "hunger bubbles" (with quotes) suggests that the term is not widely used and few if any of the existing Internet uses of the term relate to bubbles in the stomachs of any insect, or even any arthropod, or even any animal. I suggest that the caption be modified to avoid using this nonstandard term. — Anomalocaris ( talk) 21:12, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
In the "management" section, the article says "Boric acid, occasionally applied as a safe indoor insecticide, is not effective against bed bugs because they do not groom." Source cited is Miller, Dini (2008). "Bed bugs (hemiptera: cimicidae: Cimex spp.)". In Capinera, John L. Encyclopedia of Entomology (Second ed.). Springer. p. 414. ISBN 978-1-4020-6242-1.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency contradicts this at http://www2.epa.gov/bedbugs/pesticides-control-bed-bugs, which says:
Desiccants work by destroying the waxy, protective outer coating on a bed bug. Once this coating is destroyed, the bed bugs will slowly dehydrate and die. Desiccants are a valuable tool in bed bug control. Because desiccants work through a physical mode of action, the bed bugs cannot become resistant to desiccants as they can to pesticides with other modes of action. In addition, they have a long-lasting effect and don't disturb normal bed bug activities.
Examples of desiccants include:
When using desiccants to control bed bugs it is critical to use those that are registered by EPA and labeled for bed bug control. Desiccants that are intended for other uses, such as food-grade or for use in swimming pools, pose an increased inhalation risk to people. Use of desiccants is limited to cracks and crevices use only to reduce inhalation risk.
I think the EPA source is more authoritative in this case, but I'll leave it for someone more knowledgeable in these matters to make the call.
Pixeldawg ( talk) 17:44, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Bed bug. 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:19, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
Here is the current situation -
Previously at Talk:Bed_bug/Archive_1#Move_to_Cimicidae there was a proposal to move some of the content from bed bug to Cimicidae.
Here are some problems with the current organization:
I am thinking about how this should be organized. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:49, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Here is a traffic report for some bedbug articles in 2016.
For context, any article which got more than 1,300,000 views in 2016 was among Wikipedia's top 5000 articles (top 0.1%) by traffic for that year. To me, that means that "bed bug" is of broad interest and needs to meet the demands of a general audience. Wikipedia's top 10% of articles in 2016 got at least 20,000 pageviews, so I think all of these getting 30k+ are in demand. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:06, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
I wanted to share a plan for reforming this article.
I checked the current weight of the content in this article. If the current article were printed on paper, it would be 11 pages excluding citations.
The current lead of the article is four paragraphs, with 2 about the insect, 1 about infestation, and one about social topics.
Based on the traffic above, I think that readers are expecting to find information about infestation and control here, and are less interested in the insect itself because of the weight of clicks to sub topics. Here is how I think this article should be cleaned up.
Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:33, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
I removed the etymology section . Some Wikipedia articles have these but when they exist, they should go beyond what a dictionary reports. Since this seemed like dictionary information I moved it to Wiktionary at wikt:bedbug. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:17, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Bed bug. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:11, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Bed bug. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 15:48, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
I see a lack of information regarding composition and effects of bed bug saliva (and its neurological effects and maybe epigenetic human responses to the interaction). There is also a lack on how humans have historically dealt with infestations, it should be believed that some techniques for eradications/suppression may be lost/missing, especially those before the rise of modern chemicals use by humans. Its not conceivable that relocation of habitation by humans was an catch all at least from the late 17 century on. 109.49.141.100 ( talk) 13:59, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
The section on management seems to have different temperature scales in different sentences, but it is sometimes unclear which is which. " An hour at a temperature of 45 °C (113 °F) or over, or two hours at less than −17 °C (1 °F) kills them.[57] This may include a domestic clothes drier for fabric or a commercial steamer. Bed bugs and their eggs will die on contact when exposed to surface temperatures above 180 degrees and a steamer can reach well above 230 degrees.[60][16]"
This may need to be cleared up — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.35.231.162 ( talk) 04:48, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
This part of the article needs correction or specification, as some species have been proven to transmit Chagas disease.
reference:
https://blogs.agu.org/sciencecommunication/2018/07/16/good-morning-bed-bugs-left-you-chagas-disease/
"Research has shown that bed bugs are carriers of Trypanosoma cruzi (also known as T.cruzi). "
which references research like this primary article:
Rhttps://www.ajtmh.org/content/journals/10.4269/ajtmh.14-0483
please fix. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2404:440C:1082:2600:3953:780C:1E73:A5E7 ( talk) 00:19, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Reverted to status quo ante, procedural close. See my comment below. No such user ( talk) 13:36, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Bed bug (insect) →
Bed bug – Undiscussed move from a long-standing name, no other article with the same title,
WP:COMMONNAME applies
Brandmeister
talk 22:26, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
* '''Support'''
or * '''Oppose'''
, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since
polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account
Wikipedia's policy on article titles.Having reverted to status quo ante, I think that
Doc James has a point that anyone searching for, or linking to,
Bed bug, has in mind more epidemiological aspects of bed bug infestations rather than learning about lifecycle and biology of the bed bug itself. As a matter of fact, most of our articles about parasitic and infectious diseases are structured so that the primary topic is about the illness, and near the top they link to an article about the causing organism itself (e.g.
Toxoplasmosis is a
parasitic disease caused by
Toxoplasma gondii...
). This one is a counterexample by necessity, because the "common name" "bed bug" relates to the organism rather than the infection/infestation.
I'm thinking about reshuffling the contents (mostly swapping the two pages) so that we have:
I'm just thinking aloud, but I think we all should come to the best setup in an informal discussion rather than through a RM or similar process. Thoughts welcome. No such user ( talk) 13:53, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Just discovered /Archive 2#Challenges to organizing content written by Blue Rasberry back in 2017 so pinging him as well. You don't seem to have implemented much of your proposal from the time, did you? No such user ( talk) 14:56, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
Keeping the first sentence simple IMO is very important. Thus
is better than
The genus can go later in the lead. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 23:13, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
the following are not usually linked... Everyday words understood by most readers in context,and both "insect" and "blood" qualify. Instead, we should immediately provide links to the most relevant article, and it is certainly the one about the lifecycle of bed bugs themselves, i.e. Cimex. No such user ( talk) 08:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Bed bug (insect) redirects to Cimex. Only two of the Cimex species are known as bed bugs, according to the article Cimex. But the article Cimex is about the whole genus. So please redirect from Bed bug (insect) to the article about the two species known as bed bugs, which is this article here, Bed bug. @ Doc James: -- Distelfinck ( talk) 11:21, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
Doc James, Bed bug and the redirect Bed bug (insect) have the exact same topic, but you think it's better to redirect from Bed bug (insect) to the supertopic Cimex in this case. Wouldn't it then follow that Bed bug should also redirect to the supertopic? -- Distelfinck ( talk) 01:17, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Plantdrew, you reverted an edit I made in the first sentence of the article. It seems you prefer "Bed bugs are a type of insect..." over "Bed bugs are insects...." Your rationale, as far as I can tell, for the former, is, "not all bloodfeeding insects are bedbugs" The sentence ""Bed bugs are insects that feed on human blood" does not in any way suggest that bed bugs are the only insects that feed on blood. I disagree that it is preferable, in terms of style or accuracy, to say "Bed bugs are a type of insect..." because bed bugs are not a type of insect. The term, as the article says, refers to two species of the genus Cimex.
I agree "exclusively" should be changed. It was intended to convey obligate hematophagy, but if bed bugs do feed on other species, this could be read as inaccurate. Michaplot ( talk) 22:38, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
Bed bugs are insects from the genus Cimex that feed on human blood, usually at night.that was supported 2:1 in the informal RfC above, and is completely defining and grammatical. I still don't see what's wrong with that form, except that some feel it is not simple enough, something I strongly disagree with. No such user ( talk) 21:20, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
Hello @ Andrew.schalk: About [2] - it does sound that way, however there are no spam links in there so maybe not. I don't care enough to bother but this may be appropriate to instead integrate into the sentences that are already here about DE. (There are already 3 sentences about DE. Definitely not just this person's crazy idea.) If you feel like it you could do so. Then again this added text provides no refs... Invasive Spices ( talk) 17:40, 31 October 2021 (UTC)
Bedbugs have been eliminated with diatamaceous earth for many years. Bed bugs can not tolerate contact with diatamaceous earth, it destroys the waxy cuticle covering their skin, so even if they don't rip themselves apart crawling through it, they become dehydrated and then die. This is a traditional, natural, science based remedy that is non-toxic. It's not cited in a text anymore than pouring salt on a slug to kill would be cited in texts. Leaving the description as is is inaccurate, and probably actually harmful, because it doesnt take many treatments and pesticides to cure bedbugs. When I had an infestation Wikipedia was worthless in explaining how to get rid of them, and guess what? People don't look up bedbugs on Wikipedia because they're interesting,they are looking up ways to kill them. Fortunately,I went to Home Depot, and a clerk told me that diatamaceous earth is very a commonly used , told me how to apply it. The first night, I got one bite from one that apparently survived the initial diatamaceous earth contact, the second night-no bites, and there have been no more bites in 5 years. Exterminator told me it would take several treatments over a period of months,and estimated $1500. The diatamaceous earth cost $8. In fact,I only used a small portion of the bag.
So the reason I'm making the effort here is because it really sucks having an infestation,and most people can't afford the.exterminator revolving-door dangerous pesticide treatments. So please actually do a little due diligence before pulling my info, I obviously know alot more about this small portion of the article than you do. Unless your day job is an exterminator, and you don't want me taking your favorite "gravy money"scam. 24.154.37.209 ( talk) 19:33, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Hello 71.78.112.194 and @ MrOllie: I think this is a good addition now, with the EPA source. Invasive Spices ( talk) 2 October 2022 (UTC)
Links in the "External links" section should be kept to a minimum. A lack of external links or a small number of external links is not a reason to add external links.
There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate.
Minimize the number of links.
access dates are not appropriate in the external links section. Do not use {{ cite web}} or other citation templates in the External links section. Citation templates are permitted in the Further reading section.-- Otr500 ( talk) 14:39, 10 March 2023 (UTC)