Talk:Stegodyphus dumicola

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 24 January 2019 by reviewer Dan arndt (talk · contribs).

Spiders C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spiders, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spiders 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.SpidersWikipedia:WikiProject SpidersTemplate:WikiProject SpidersSpiders articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 15 September 2020 and 17 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Akwan826.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:49, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Behavioral Ecology Student Suggestions[edit]

Lilygreenberg (talk) 17:39, 29 November 2020 (UTC) One suggestion I have is to move the balloooning subheading to under the reproduction heading instead of under the heading locomotion, I think that it has more of a belonging under the reproduction section and also is a bit misleading in the locomotion section. Also it previously said that the spiders length was 23-3.5 mm long, I assumed this was meant to say 2.3-3.5 mm long, and corrected for this, however this should be verified through the source used to obtain this information.[reply]

SatvikR78 (talk) 11:05, 01 December 2020 (UTC): Great article! I particularly enjoyed the section on Enemies, because I have not seen this in many of the other Spider articles, and I found it particularly hard to find information for my spider's enemies and predators. I made a few edits. I moved a couple of sentences in your Description section to right under your "Social Behavior" heading. I felt like it worked a lot better as a lead in to social behavior rather than as a description of the spider's physical features. I edited your sentence starting with "Population founding.." so that it flowed better, and same with the sentence starting with "They specifically reside" in the habitat section. I think there was a typo in your "Diet" section, so I made the "spider" a sub-heading similar to "spiderling", and I think it now makes sense. I would suggest possible moving the "prey capture" subsection to a behavior or diet section, but definitely up to you what feels better. Please change back any of the edits if you don't like them![reply]

Hi Amy! I enjoyed reading this article - very thorough and easy to read. I noticed that the article contained a template at the top that stated the article was not extensively linked. I see that several users have added links since the template was added and I added a series of blue links myself. I linked to some of the article's more specific terms as well as to the pages of the spiders whose scientific names you listed. It now seems properly linked so I went ahead and removed the template. Otherwise, I just made some small grammatical changes that I think will help with clarity. -Eanisman (talk) 04:03, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]