This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects 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.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects articles
Latest comment: 16 years ago5 comments5 people in discussion
.
But either direction would work, and the title can be changed/moved anytime anyway, so I've changed the templates to direction-agnostic. :) --Quiddity00:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)Reply
Disagree. The article about the species may be poor, but that doesn't mean it should be merged with something else. Distinct species merit their own article! BalthCat02:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
I agree. Turn the lac article into a subsection of shellac, and have lac redirect directly to that subsection. Less redundancy, and just as useful. There should be a separate article on lac-secreting insects, which should be linked from the subsection on lac and in shellac more generally -- but that material doesn't seem to exist at all yet. Inhumandecency16:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)Reply
Shellac is what I searched for; I had never heard of the insect Lac. I think that vastly more people would make the same search that I did, rather than for the insect Lac. A sub-section on the insect that makes shellac is interesting and appropriate.Jdlyall
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
From the sources I'm finding, the only difference between lac and shellac is that shellac has been refined. I don't know how I feel about reorganization, but I do feel that so long as shellac is a separate article, this article should only mention shellac in WP:SUMMARY style. Concerning the lac insect, Banglapedia is a very informative source; I'll try to work it into the article. -Verdatum (talk) 19:12, 5 May 2008 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 5 months ago4 comments4 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.