A fact from Palaeontinidae appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 August 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that fossils of extinct giant cicadas(pictured) were once misidentified as the oldest known butterflies?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource 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.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
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
Since wings can't overlap each other, an edit is needed from someone more competent than I.--Wetman (talk) 17:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oof. Sorry for that, heh. Fixed.-- Obsidi♠nSoul 17:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As for your other edit. Actually no. "nodal line" = "transverse flexion line". These are discrete terms, not purely descriptive, and one isn't a part of the other. Terminology in the study of palaeontinid wing morphology is not exactly standardized yet, so mentioning the two is better.
As for the dissecting through the wing wording, note that this is to differentiate it from the later form in which the nodal line is proximal to the body (i.e. the wing is not 'divided' equally/the line is not midway between the point of attachment of the forewing and the tip of the forewing). Not sure how to word it right, heh, but I think your edit made it seem even more ambiguous. -- Obsidi♠nSoul 17:22, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
