Talk:Bombus transversalis

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

Insects: Hymenoptera Low‑importance 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 articles 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).

I am a student at Washington University in St. Louis doing research for a class project. I am excited to be contributing to the Wikipedia community. Any comments and feedback are welcome. Thank you! Brandon.eng (talk) 06:53, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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): Brandon.eng. Peer reviewers: Mira.tbaum, Cratermann, Liz.yucknut, Kew8888.

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

This is a well-written, and well organized article. There were only a few changes that I made in the Trails, Structure, Queen Selection, and Construction sections. In the Trails section, I changed "extent" to "extend" (which I think was simply a typo). I also changed "up to five" to "five or more" for ease of flow. In the Structure section, I changed "it cone like" to "it is cone-like", which I believe was just another simple typing issue. For the Queen Selection section, I changed the title to Nest Selection. Although it is the queen that selects the best nest, the section is primarily about the nest selection, not the queen. In the Construction section, there was just one more typing error, where I changed "dualpurpose" to "dual purpose". Also, I went back and italicized B. transversalis in all the sections, as well as linking and italicizing all of these other species discussed. But overall, this article is off to a great start! Liz.yucknut (talk) 21:04, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article covers a wide variety of topics. That being said, I felt that many of the interesting sections left me wanting to know more details. Expanding on these topics and fully developing some of the specific talking points would go a long way for this article. The most striking aspect of this article was the absence of in-text citations (as noted by the text bar at the top). I added several of these links throughout the article. I also went though and attempted to italicize any genus and species that were lacking proper italicization. I added a sentence in the "Distribution and Habitat" section of the specific range of the bumblebee. This has the potential to become a well-developed and interesting article. Cratermann (talk) 21:44, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Good work with this article, though I have a suggestion. I think there are too many subsections within this article, and it's better to just merge the content. For example, the "relationship with other animals" section should have no subsections and it's only necessary to merge them. You should still separate the paragraphs from each other though and don't merge them into a single one. Burklemore1 (talk) 14:16, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your article contains a great deal of information. I specifically enjoyed your constant comparison between your species and other bees, ants, etc. I added more links throughout all of you sections. I also fixed some of your phrasing as it made your article more difficult to read. For example, you introduced a sentence with the phrase, "It was thence shown…" which I deleted because it did not add much to the phrase and simply was distracting. While you do have good information within each of your sections, I would have liked to see more information on the colony cycle. For example, the male production, colonization, reproduction (mating, kin selection, etc) and virgin queen production. I found one sentence that confused me. You discussed that, "it is believed that when the sun is at its hottest, workers will stand at the entrance of the colony and fan the nest to reduce temperature and humidity" seemed like a guess rather than having any evidence. You could possibly add a source or look into this more. Overall, the information you provide is very interesting! mira.tbaum (talk) 09:17, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article is well written and clearly organized, however, I made a few changes to improve it further. I described the Hymenopteran order in the taxonomy section. I added links to rainforest, foraging, honey, temperate, ants, saplings, worker bees, and tropics. I also fixed a number of links for compound words that only linked the first part of the word. I changed some of the sections headings to only have the first word uppercase. More generally, I corrected a few grammatical issues. Though there may limited information available in recent literature, I would recommend adding more information on colony structure, mating behaviors, and social behaviors if possible. This article would also benefit from having more pictures and referencing by whom the species was first described in the tax box.

Mkfreiler (talk) 02:43, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the overview, I removed “themselves” from after “workers” in the second sentence as it did not feel particularly necessary. I removed “the” from before the species name under distribution as this is not typically how species are referred to. I fixed this same problem again in the parasitoid wasp section. In the distribution section I also deleted “terra firme,” as this is not a well known term and the definition of what it means suffices. I also removed a small typo from the army ant section. The only other suggestion I would make is that throughout the article you refer to the species by its full name, but in most cases you should just abbreviate it to B. transversalis. Otherwise, this article is quite good. Mandeljulia (talk) 02:33, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1) In the overview section, I deleted the word “the” from the sentence “Unlike its relatives, [the] Bombus transversalis” for grammatical correction. 2) One thing to keep in mind is to keep tenses the same throughout the piece. Bombus transversalis should be treated as a singular noun, so change ‘are’ and ‘they’ to ‘is’ and ‘it,’ respectively. 3) In Distribution and habitat section, “Their nests are found in soil which is not flooded” should be changed to something like “Its nests are found in unflooded soil” or along those lines, but be careful to use negatives in sentences because they make the piece more confusing to read. 4) I think the Colony cycle section should be expanded upon more. More details can be added for a better understanding of the bee’s annual cycle. For example, what months are considered the wet season and dry season? How does the queen find a new colony? How do workers play into this process? 5) For the Alerting section, how exactly does the bee alert the other bees to tell them about food? For the trails section, I recommend stating the purpose of the trail in the first sentence rather than at the end. This would allow for better clarification of where the information is going. 6) In the Selection section, I just added a comma after “First” for grammatical correction. 7) Other than stated, I would suggest finding and adding more pictures to the article so that readers may have a better depiction of the species. This was a great article to read! Good job.

Kew8888 (talk) 12:48, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am an undergraduate student at Washington University making edits for this article. This article was well-written, but there are a couple of edits I was able to make. First, I edited many of the titles to make the descriptors correctly capitalized. In addition, I removed unnecessary capitalization of many words in the “Taxonomy and Phylogeny” section. I also rephrased a couple of awkwardly worded sentences under the “Relationship with Other Animals” section. In addition, I changed the title “Relationship with Other Animals” to “Interactions with Other Species.” Eliseoh (talk) 05:03, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article was well written and easy to follow. However, to improve this article, I think it need to have more information on the behavior of the species. Also, I think it would be great if you could give more specific information about the colony cycle and expand the “Alerting” section in particular. The information about nesting in the “Taxonomy” section is not awkward but I think it might fit better under distribution and habitat section or nest section. There were some places that needed citations so I marked them in the article. Overall, this article was interesting to read. Good job!KimCourtney (talk) 21:46, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

One thing that immediately drew my attention was the limited number of sources for the article. There are only 7. Though you have a decent amount of information under each heading, it would increase the credibility of your article if you include more sources. Under the “Nest” heading, I would also consider reordering the subheadings to have the “Selection” subheading first as it details which environments are most suitable for the building of a nest. I also think the “Construction” subheading would work better as a subheading for “Trails” because it talks more about the importance of trails in constructing the nest rather than the actual process of constructing a nest. Lastly, I would consider moving “Controlling Environment” to a subheading under “Structure” or merging the two sections together since both talk about how the structure of the nest help combat the weather conditions. Megxb (talk) 04:57, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]