---

This image: http://en.wikiped...f_crop.jpg is identified in Wikipedia as Musca domestica and is used to illustrate several articles including that on the Housefly. It has even been selected as Picture of the Day on English Wikipedia.

However, I think the gap between the eyes looks too narrow for a male M. domestica and it looks more like a male M. autumnalis. I suppose, as the photo was taken in Dar es salaam, Tanzania, it could even be another species of Musca.

Can anyone say for sure whether the image is of Musca domestica or not, and if not, which species is it?

---

The image author, Muhammad Mahdi, is a forum member and in 2009 posted 3 Musca pictures - but not this one! - for ID. Though he supposed to have found M. domestica, in all cases expert opinion was different. M. autumnalis was no alternative. So also the fly of Wikipedia might be another African species. What do our Muscologists say?

---

Muhammad Mahd does take some great photos on wikipedia, the IDs however are often dubious, and he often replaces good quality, well identified photos on articles with those of his own as he did on 3 February 2010 with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housefly

Dipterists are often critical of wikipedia. However if an article in incorrect, incomplete or whatever, it's up to us to fix is and set a good example for all. Dont criticsise wikipedia - fix it!

Mark

---

I was intending to fix it, or at least leave a comment on the discussion page outlining the problem, but I wanted to hear what the experts thought first. Thanks anyway, sundew and Mark,

---

It would be nice to have a name to what is a great photo.

As whel as our Muscologists look at all the other flies that are on wiki commons the are in the Musca domestica catagory that are clearly not this species.

http://commons.wi..._domestica