Talk:Bombus pauloensis

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bombus pauloensis article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Insects: Hymenoptera Low‑importance

	Insects portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Hymenoptera task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jkottapalli. Peer reviewers: Allykunze, Tefrancis, Claire.packer.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review

I this paper had a lot of information in the behavior section. I would try to explain different the section on Queen Replacement, since that section seems a little confusing to follow. I think you can explain that a bit better so that anyone can read it easily. I would also try to include a section on the effect of these bees on Humans and any interactions it has with other animals and plants. I also think a section on foraging that expands on the type of plants that this bee might use to get nectar from. Overall I think it was a pretty good article. the review below also had good points about redundancy on the section of Queens with other beings in the behavior section. Great job! Tefrancis (talk) 01:50, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback

I thought that your article was very informative but I had several edits/suggestions for you to make. I edited some grammatical errors and typos in your article. Make sure to avoid using the passive voice too frequently. I deleted the first half of your Taxonomy & Phylogeny section because you don't need to repeat what is already written in the right hand box. Maybe add some more fun facts about your bee in that section, what makes them distinct, etc. The biggest problem I saw with the article was that you are lacking citations for the majority of your facts. If you are saying anything about the bee that is not common knowledge, it needs a citation, especially if it is the first sentence of a paragraph. I would also be careful not to repeat your information in too many of the sections, it would be better to have a shorter article that only stated facts when necessary, for example, there seems to be many overlaps between the section on Social Dominance Hierarchy, Queen Replacement, Queen Queen Interactions and Queen Behavior. Great article over all, make sure you get those citations and I hope that my edits are helpful. Claire.packer (talk) 17:46, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments/editions

I made quite a few edits for writing flow and clarity. Further, I think that the article could probably benefit from more citations, especially towards the end of the article (thermal regulation only has one citation). I also think the article would benefit from sections on things other than behavior, like a section on diet or distribution. A picture of the species would also be a great addition. Overall, though, this is definitely a good start to the page! Allykunze (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]