Talk:Scaptotrigona mexicana

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Scaptotrigona mexicana 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).

Mexico Low‑importance

	Mexico portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico 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.MexicoWikipedia:WikiProject MexicoTemplate:WikiProject MexicoMexico
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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): Paanur. Peer reviewers: Allykunze, Khan.nadia, Claire.packer.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General Feedback

Great article overall! I corrected the typos that I saw and a few grammatical/sentence structure issues. I have a few further suggestions: I would explain what it mean for the males to be haploid and how it effects sex ratios. I would also define physiogastric, that is not a commonly known term. The thing that I was most confused by was the section about drones. Aren't drones just male bees? How are they formed? I would make sure to clarify this and fact check. Another question I had was how within species communication decreases competition, I would try and go over this a little more. Also, it seems as though you are missing citations in some places, make sure that every fact has a citation! Other than those concepts this was a well written and well researched article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Claire.packer (talk • contribs) 00:59, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I thought that the male subsection could be deleted completely, so I removed this from the entry. I also italicized the times the species was mentioned throughout the article. Further, I took out some of the spaces between paragraphs within sections that I found unnecessary. There were times that S. mexicana was written as S.mexicana, so I edited this. I made several additions or deletions in the wording of sections of the article, as well. Under mating selection, there was a weird issue with a reference, but I was unsure what was supposed to be cited so I did not make any alterations, but this should be fixed. I thought that the entry was pretty complete as far as content, but probably could have used more information under queen and worker characteristics, and perhaps the environmental adaptations section could have information about conservation as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allykunze (talk • contribs) 17:51, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

This article provided a lot of great information and is overall a really good entry! I fixed the minor grammatical errors that I found throughout the page. Also, I added a separate "Colony Cycle" section to cover your subsections pertaining to colony. I moved the "Environmental Adaptations" subsection to the "Distribution and Habitat" section, as I though it fit better there since it was talking about the geography and habitat. One thing I was confused about in the article was the mention of drones and the drone section. I thought drones were just male bees and that seemed to be the case in some parts of the article, but in the "drones" section, a drone seemed to be like a nest or a swarm that the bees form. I think it would be helpful if you defined what a drone is and see if the word is implying two different meanings depending on the circumstance. I found it interesting how important the specie's honey is for medicinal use. I thought the layout of the page flowed pretty well and was nicely organized. Nice work! Khan.nadia (talk) 03:45, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More thoughts

Great job on this article! I found your sections on the colony cycle and kin selection to be very thorough and well-written. I also appreciate the variety of sources you obtained in the writing of this article, it is very well researched. I think that the addition of more photos in general throughout the article as they relate to each section as well as a range map would lend very well to the article. While the first two sections of the colony cycle are very thorough and well-written, I think that the subsection on colony decline would benefit from a more thorough discussion.Mebennett49 (talk) 00:14, 22 November 2015 (UTC)Mebennett49[reply]

The organization of this article makes it easy to read through the information and find specifics that a reader might be looking for. A stronger description of the appearance would be beneficial because of the limited pictures of S. mexicana. I also think there should be a description of what exactly virgin queens are because there is no Wikipedia page to link it to. Like another reviewer, I am confused as to the usage of “drone” in this article as compared to other uses of drones, meaning a male bee. This is seen in both the Colony growth and Drone Congregation sections. Clarification on those parts would be beneficial as well. Overall, this article is very well researched and comprehensive! Shelly May (talk) 08:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)Shelly May[reply]