Talk:Love dart/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

DYK hit record!

NOTE: Quoting from a post to Invertzoo from BorgQueen: "According to this statistics, Love dart got 30,100 hits on the day it was featured, which is the second-highest DYK record of all time. Congrats! --BorgQueen (talk) 07:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)" Invertzoo (talk) 16:30, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

SEM image

Image:Love-darts.png is cropped into 8 single images and it is possible to use them in separates species articles and in way in this article too. --Snek01 (talk) 21:06, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Image of Zonitoides dart

There is an image of darts of some Zonitoides at http://delta-intkey.com/britmo/images/taydart.jpg. Description is at http://delta-intkey.com/britmo/www/zonitida.htm and reference http://delta-intkey.com/britmo/www/refs.htm The book is very probably public domain (depends on other coaouthors and illustrators if any) but I have no the book and can not found it to download. --Snek01 (talk) 21:06, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Which ref is it Snek? Which book? I might be able to find it in the AMNH library. Invertzoo (talk) 20:37, 9 October 2008 (UTC) OH, wait a minute, you mean, "Taylor, J.W. 1894-1914. Monograph of the land and freshwater Mollusca of the British Isles. Vols. 1-3. Taylor Brothers, Leeds." Let me see in a couple of weeks if the library has it, I can look at it and tell you which are the Zonitoides darts, and also who the coauthors and illustrators were. Invertzoo (talk) 20:39, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Possibly sexist imagery?

It seems as though the image here might be misconstrued to be pushing a phallic, penis-centered agenda. Any idea if we can get an image that won't lead to such misunderstandings? Mwahcysl (talk) 10:23, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Goodness gracious, that won't do at all. You are absolutely right... would someone with the correct image that doesn't lead to such unfortunate misunderstandings please rescue this situation? --Geronimo20 (talk) 11:01, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Troll detected. --86.146.160.234 (talk) 17:24, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree. In order to keep trolls away, we should get a better image. Does anyone have one? Mwahcysl (talk) 18:28, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Mention of purpose in lead section?

I think it would be particularly helpful to those just skimming the topic to have a quick summary of the purpose of the love dart in the lead section. That would definitely help make the article much more accessible to readers just looking for a quick overview. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 15:32, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Mendaliv, that's an excellent suggestion. Done. Invertzoo (talk) 18:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

How do they get rid of it...

when it's over? does the flesh eject the dart outwards, or dissolve it ? NVO (talk) 20:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

That's also a very good question, and one I have wondered about myself over the last week. So far I have not seen any discussion of that question in the literature, but we will try to look and see if any researchers have made observations on that. Invertzoo (talk) 20:35, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Parmarionidae

Parmarionidae is not a family used in Taxonomy of the Gastropoda (Bouchet & Rocroi, 2005). The information in the article should be updated according this new taxonomy. --Snek01 (talk) 23:32, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

You are right Snek. That would be good to do. I am going to be out all day tomorrow, but I can have a go at working this out over the weekend. That is unless you beat me to it. Best, Invertzoo (talk) 00:06, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I had a go at cleaning that taxonomy section up tonight. I also created stub articles for a few superfamilies in order to get rid of the red links there. I did it all in a bit of a hurry and I am a bit sleepy, but hopefully it all makes sense. Invertzoo (talk) 01:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Similar structures in other gastropod groups

Hi Snek, I am not sure exactly what your note means about this section, but if you mean that the cone snail part should be shortened considerably, and simply link to the relevant part of the cone snail article, then I agree with you. Invertzoo (talk) 17:30, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and did what you suggested. Invertzoo (talk) 17:41, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Sarcobelum

Snek, I rewrote this a little, but I hope I did not change the meaning? "During evolution, darts appear to have been lost secondarily, for example in many Helicoidea, in which the surrounding organs have degenerated too. The sarcobelum is a fleshy or cuticle-coated papilla which is considered to be a degenerated, dart-bearing organ." Please let me know if this is incorrect. Thanks. Invertzoo (talk) 21:41, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I have added the word previously dart-bearing organ. The source mention it directly in this way: previously dart-bearing papilla. I understand it like this: The sarcobelum have no dart. The dart disappeared first. Then the papilla degenerated to sarcobelum. --Snek01 (talk) 23:17, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

That's good, it reads well now and is unambiguous. Invertzoo (talk) 21:28, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Camaenidae

It seems that there http://www.kingsnake.com/westindian/metazoa1.html is Zachrysia provisoria (family Camaenidae) with a love dart!

Related article (I guess that there could be useful information.) is here http://mollus.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/citation/eym030v1, but it has no free access. --Snek01 (talk) 23:13, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Philomycidae

On the webpage http://www.nps.gov/grsm/naturescience/seedgrants.htm there is a guide to identification of land snails with link. The publication contains the image of some Philomycus darts, maybe of Philomycus flexuolaris. --Snek01 (talk) 23:03, 3 November 2008 (UTC)