This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Lepidoptera Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lepidoptera, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of butterflies and moths 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.LepidopteraWikipedia:WikiProject LepidopteraTemplate:WikiProject LepidopteraLepidoptera Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Is there a 'Endangered Lepidoptera' -category? This species should at least be there, though in eastern europe this is only rare.

I haven't the faintest but there defiantly should be one. -- IvanTortuga 00:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Just for information, there is international (but friendly) disagreement on the conjugation of the remaining northern fenland subspecies: L. d. batavus in the UK; L. d. batava in the Netherlands.

-- GRM (talk) 17:28, 13 February 2024 (UTC)Reply

I made a significant intervention (deletion) after someone else made a minor change. Sections of this article are in illogical sequence and some read badly. Not sure when I can find time to rewrite and update with latest published info—GRM (talk) 07:37, 25 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

OK, so I had free time and I'm "allowed" to "play" with AI for work-related CPD. I asked Anthropic Claude Opus 4.1 to reorganize the article and it seems to have made significant improvement to the existing version. I have saved it in my Sandbox, but want time to review and edit it thoroughly (not to mention update a lot of the info related to Dutch and English populations), so I suggest we put this article on hold till I can update it. May I suggest that any suggestions for edits to this article be placed here on the Talk page?

Thanks—GRM (talk) 16:03, 25 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

OK. It is done. Fret not: I have read it through and made editorial tweaks.

I'd be grateful if someone with interest could review. The article is far from comprehensive, but I feel the information is now much better organized, with unnecessary detail and duplications removed, plus "conflicts" resolved.

Thanks—GRM (talk) 15:59, 26 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

The observant among you will notice that I have added new text on: feeding characteristics; genetic and field studies; distribution; and host plants. Happy for anyone to review. I can source lots of info on the history of the species, especially reintroduction attempts, in the UK, plus behavioural stuff. It would be good to get more info from the species' Asian range (currently restricted to subspecies and South Korea status). I am currently working on an expanded review of conservation status based on information available online (including journal articles). Thanks—GRM (talk) 16:06, 26 August 2025 (UTC)Reply