Talk:Metapolybia cingulata

Samontenegro (talk) 17:49, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

thoughts again

I added some useful links in the first paragraph and fixed some grammar things. I advise the supplication of the photo, if one is available. Explaining usurpation behaviors and flexible group behaviors in the intro might be beneficial, because they are ambiguous in meaning. First you claimed water controlled the tempo of the nest building, but then in the next section you said flexible pulp foragers set the tempo, there should be a consistent explanation. If possible you should find a range map, but I don't even know how to do that. I changed numerals under 9 to be text like nine because I think that’s just good writing. I really like all the working castes in your species! I think you explained their functions really really well. Many of the earlier sections are pretty sparse, I assume its because of a lack of source material, but flesh them out if you can.

Some suggestions

There is a lot of detail in this article, and I really appreciate the amount of hard work and research that went into writing this article. I just have a few little things that I have changed/ other suggestions that think would make this a better article, even though I think the article already provides a comprehensive overview of the wasp: 1. In the ‘Taxonomy’ section, I linked “Vespidae” to the Vespidae wikipedia article, and combined the last and the penultimate sentence together for better flow. 2. I edited the first sentence and corrected a typo on the first sentence of the ‘Description’ section. 3. I also changed the heading of the section ‘Description’ and ‘Distribution’ to ‘Description and Identification’ and ‘Distribution and Habitat.’ 4. Heading for the section ‘Usurpation’ was bolded, so I changed it so that it would be the same as the other headings. 5. I think the second sentence of the subsection ‘Aggression’ is left unfinished since it stops with the phrase “Typically, whenever an individual is seen spreading.”- so I would finish up that sentence. 6. In the ‘Case Study’ subsection under the ‘Behavior’ section, I would change the heading to a different one that shows what the case study was actually about (instead of just saying ‘Case Study’) so the readers would have a better idea as to what kind of behavioral case study that you are talking about. But otherwise, great work!! JackieOh0223 (talk) 00:22, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Recommendations

Your article was very well written, thorough, and covered many important aspects of the behavior of Metapolybia cingulata. I felt like your work was well organized, and you did a great job detailing aspects of your species life, like in the category of Nests. When it comes to structure of your article, you had quite a few subcategories. I went ahead and bolded these as well as added some capitalizations in order to make them stand out a bit more. In addition, I added more links to other Wikipedia pages throughout your article, which will hopefully increase traffic on your page (like Polistes, Vespidae, Metapolybia aztecoides, polygynous, Synoeca septentrionalis,…)! I also took out two links under Taxonomy for wasps that don’t have pages yet, and added a link to one of our fellow classmate’s wasp. Additionally, I went through and made some edits, including breaking up longer sentences either by adding punctuation or splitting the sentence into two. There were also a few sentences that didn’t flow too well, so I went ahead and made edits on those also. It would also be nice to see maybe information on how this species effects humans and why’d they’d be of importance to us. Is there any information out there about if they contribute agriculturally through pollination, the impact of their stings if they do indeed sting, or use are there any ways humans have found use for their venom? Also involving other species, are there parasitic relationship established involving your wasp? What do they eat and maybe talk about any potential predators or if they fulfill that role. Overall really great work and good job with your article in the future! Daphne Deng (talk) 2:40, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review

I want to say that I really appreciate all the hard work that went into this article! I just have a couple suggestions, mostly on grammar. I found this section a little unclear so I changed this sentence “M. cingulata appears to be mostly dark or black and color and have translucent wings attached to its back” to “M. cingulata presents a mostly dark or black coloration coupled with translucent wings attached to its back” in order to give the reader an easier time in comprehension. Other than that, there were a few times where you forgot punctuation but I added it! Great job.

Spencer Tong (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:55, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Comments

I thought this article was really great! I edited some grammatical errors (deleted commas, changed wording etc.) and also added several additional links. I thought the article was really well organized and had a lot of really great information in the present sections; however, if possible (though it depends on the available articles), I believe additional sections on other topics would also be great to be included. Yangjennyh (talk) 23:21, 16 November 2014 (UTC)