Talk:Brachygastra lecheguana

Gaharrison94 (talk) 03:31, 26 September 2014 (UTC)gaharrison94Gaharrison94 (talk) 03:31, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

My main advice on this article is to consider your citations. Its clear you were very cautious about citing everything all the time, which is a good practice, but can be a bit overdone. I changed some spots where entire paragraphs were from the same source, instead of a citation at the end of each sentence there is only one at the end of the paragraph. You often break up sentences with citations which is prioritizes source clarity over reader connivence which is fine if thats what you want. You had some cases of double citations, the same source cited twice at the end of a sentence, I got rid of those. Also the headings should only have the first word capitalized so I fixed that for you. Annamargit (talk) 20:34, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

I thought this article was well written, aside from a few minor grammatical errors, and provided a general overview of the wasp. Although I found the information to be very interesting and well researched, given the many references and the multiple citations for each fact, I believe that it could have included additional topics. The article included several main topics some of which had several sub headings; thus, it was surprising that there wasn't other information, such as that of kin selection and life history, though some of life history may have been glossed over within the colony cycle section. Overall, however, I believe that this article is off to a very good start. Yangjennyh (talk) 21:07, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

I appreciated how well rounded this page was and how many topics it managed to elaborate on. As evidenced by the sources, a lot of research clearly went into this article. I did make a few grammatical and organizational edits to help the article flow better. Especially under "Human Interactions", I reworded some of your sentences so that the verb tenses would line up and so that it was more clear what your pronouns were referring to. A suggestion I have is to add more pictures or diagrams so that there can be breaks between each section of text. Samontenegro (talk) 04:30, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Overall this page looks good. In order to move the article to better status, I would recommend adding a picture or 2 of the species. I would also try to add a distribution map if available and a visual on whether the species is abundant, in danger, etc. Your facts are well referenced and the grammar is precise. The article is very well linked too. Once these simple changes are made, I believe your article meets the Good Article Standards. Alison Gozlan (talk) 01:24, 21 November 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brachygastra lecheguana. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006132820/http://www.eeb.uconn.edu/people/willig/student_pages/Presley%20PDFs/Santos_Presley_2010.pdf to http://www.eeb.uconn.edu/people/willig/student_pages/Presley%20PDFs/Santos_Presley_2010.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:05, 7 November 2016 (UTC)