Talk:Bombus hypnorum

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): Tefrancis. Peer reviewers: Orchidabar, Floyd Burney, Rasikareddy1019.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review

This article on the Bombus hypnorum bee is good overall. I fixed some grammar points in the Overview and Habitat sections. I suggest adding a fun fact about the bee in the Overview. I also noticed that the B. hypnorum was not italicized in most places, so I tried to correct those throughout the article. In terms of expanding the Wikipedia page, I suggest researching and adding more information to the sections of Taxonomy and Phylogeny and a few sections under the heading Interactions as these sections only have about one sentence in them currently. I think that the article explains the mating behavior, habitats, and distribution of the bee very well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rasikareddy1019 (talk • contribs) 21:56, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

This article has a lot of promise. I have corrected the rest of the unitalisized B. hypnorum, and I have restructured some sentences throughout the piece. I have also added hyperlinks to as many of the plants and insects as I could find. As the above comment says, the biggest suggestion that I would make would be to add more to each section. Ten sections (including the overview) have three senetences or less. Also, the Worker-Worker Conflict section doesn't make sense. " this bee would eat the eats of any other workers that were laying eggs..." I assume that the "eats" should be eggs, but I couldn't access the source; thus, I didn't make the change. The Olfactory Senses section doesn't explain what the responses are, how the chemicals are sensed, and why the queen has the highest response. As the section is now, I think it should be deleted. Finally, the Humans section needs to be cited. The Description, Distribution, and Habitat sections are well conceived. The rest of the topics just need to be expanded. Floyd Burney (talk) 18:39, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

This article includes a variety of information that provides the reader with a breath of information about Bombus hypnorum. This article requires a map distribution in order to be complete on the right hand side. I mostly added hyperlinks and italicized necessary words throughout the article. The overview section is a bit brief. I recommend adding a few summaries of this bees’ basic morphology, habitat and behavior. For example, since this bee is a tree bumblebee, one could briefly explain this habitat in the overview. Speaking of habitat, it would be fascinating to me as a reader to learn about the evolutionary advantage of this habitat form in the habitat section. Readers would enjoy greater detail in the Taxonomy and Phylogeny section, such as the meaning of the genus and species, plus its relevance to the bee’s characteristics. Claims are well referenced. The behavior section includes importing mating information, but could use more information on foraging and communication behavior. All in al, this article has immense potential to be considered a good article.Orchidabar (talk) 03:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review

I think that there are a few things that your article could improve upon. In general, there could be more information in a lot of sections, specifically the Taxonomy and Breeding sections. I think that Nest Usurpation should be placed as a subheading under Nest and Mating Frequency could also be a subheading of Mating. Breeding section should also be placed under Behavior and Life History should also be placed under Colony Cycle. Olfactory Senses relates to behavior, and should be made as a section under Behavior. With more details, I think this article is on its way to Good Article status! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rasikareddy1019 (talk • contribs) 05:18, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Feedback

If possible I would add more information to your introduction, often that is all a reader will look at. I added a few more links to increase the relevance of your page. If possible, I would add a range map to show your readers where Bombus hypnorum live. Claire.packer (talk) 00:18, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments

My edits to your page were to fix grammar and punctuation errors and to edit for clarity. The introduction could use some more interesting facts to “hook” the reader. Also, the Taxonomy and Phylogeny section could use a lot more information—maybe you could discuss the order and family that B. hypnorum is part of. There are some clarity issues that I didn’t fix because I didn’t know exactly what you were going for. In the Distribution section, you write that B. hypnorum was found in Iceland, and “queens have been found every year since.” Does that mean that the B. hypnorum individuals initially found were not queens? And that queens were subsequently found in Iceland after this initial discovery? I would go in and make that more clear! You also write that these bees likely won’t go into rural Iceland—why? Similarly, the Social Parasite section is a little confusing. I would explain more about how the repellant that B. norvegicus uses affects B. hypnorum and why it’s important. Also, you might want to add some more detail to certain headings. For instance, the Queen-Worker conflict mentions that this species is of the order Hymenoptera but does not delve into an explanation as to precisely how and why that leads to worker conflict. (Mpmaz (talk) 22:19, 1 December 2015 (UTC))

Suggestions

This article was concise and easy to understand. All information contained in the article was correctly cited, and the large variety of pictures truly made the article aesthetically pleasing and fun to read about. I noticed that there were relatively few imbedded links, so I went ahead and added links for “Rubus fruticosus,” and “Tergum.” I would recommend moving information for “Nest Usurpation” from “Breeding” to “Behavior” as the information included seems to pertain to the act of one colony taking over another colony, rather than breeding behavior itself. I would also suggest adding more information to the subsection on “Breeding” as information seemed as bit sparse. Furthermore, I went ahead and corrected a few grammar and punctuation errors that were present in the article, for example, consolidating the following two sentences: “The bees in this nest contain workers of sometimes two or three different fathers. Sometimes, there are some workers in the nest that are not genetically related to the queen and come from another nest. [10]” The new sentence reads: “Members may had different fathers, and even come from completely different nests or be unrelated entirely.” In this way, the sentence which were relatively short and choppy before, are now easier to read, while conveying the same information. Overall, however, I thought the article was very good!Mmc7777 (talk) 02:41, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

New edit

Hey thanks for letting me edit your article a little bit. I didn't do much except add some hyperlinks to some words and add a picture at the social parasite section to make the article more visually appealing. I agree with the other editors in that you could make the Social Parasite section a little more clear. I enjoyed reading your article otherwise! Matthewkim93 (talk) 23:59, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Further Comments

I added another sentence to the introduction of this article to make the opening a little more interesting. I included a citation for that section as well since there did not seem to be one previously. I also fixed some of the grammar in the habitat section. I removed a heading entitled "Life History" because it had no information under it. Overall, this article is coming along nicely! I think that the taxonomy and phylogeny section could use a bit more explanation and information. Danakes6 (talk) 05:00, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review

Good work on this article! The article was easy to understand and not overly complicated. I appreciate the many images presents, as it gives readers visual aids to associate with the text. There were many hyperlinks included which is great. I fixed a few small grammatical errors and added a couple more hyperlinks. Additionally, I changed the layout by moving the Nest Usurpation from breeding to the 'Habitat' section, although I'm not entirely sure if that's where it best belongs, so you may want to check that out. I think as whole, the article could benefit from further information being added to sections. There were 20 resources cited from, so I'm sure more detail and information can be found and inserted into the page. Additionally, I think the addition of a foraging subsection in the behavior section would positively impact the article, so if you could find information on that, that would be great. I thought that the breeding section was very concise and unless further information could be added to the heading, I think it can be removed and the information under it could be placed elsewhere. Overall, very nice job! Keep up the good work! Khan.nadia (talk) 05:06, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Suggestions

I really like that you included so many pictures of the species; it greatly improves the article and makes it more enjoyable to read. One thing I also noticed was that information under each subheading was not equally spaced – some had very little in comparison to others. To fix this, it might help to merge a couple of subheadings. You can also find more information on each topic. For example, in the “Taxonomy and Phylogeny” section, you could add a couple details on the genus and family so that there is not just one line in the section. I also think that the article could use some reorganization of the headings. I feel like “Diet” should stand alone and have “Nest Usurpation” and “Social Parasite” moved under “Behavior”. Megxb (talk) 05:27, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Picture correction

Hi, never contributed before, no idea of guidelines so my apologies if I'm not following them, just a quick point the picture captioned: "Tree Bumblebee searching for nectar" I think shows a carpenter bee, Xylocopa sp. and not a bumblebee. best wishes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.222.65.71 (talk) 14:43, 8 February 2016 (UTC)