Talk:Polybioides tabidus

General

This article includes a lot of good, in-depth information about this species! There is a lot of information about kin selection and cyclical oligogyny, but you could expand on areas like distribution and habitat and colony cycle. I included some suggestions that I was wondering when I read the article. I also made small changes, such as changing Polybioides tabidus to P. tabidus after the first occurrence of the full name and minor grammatical errors. Mayxac (talk) 23:12, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Overview

The overview could include where the species likes to nest and maybe a fun fact, such as something about swarm-founding to make it a little longer. Mayxac (talk) 23:12, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Taxonomy and phylogeny

Since the article mentions the phylogenetic tree for the relation between Polybioides and Belonogaster, it might be helpful to the reader if you included an image of the phylogenetic tree. Mayxac (talk) 23:12, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Description and identification

What colors are the species? Are there colored differences between the different castes? Mayxac (talk) 23:12, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Distribution and habitat

Does this species only like to nest in forested areas? Are all the nests aerial or are there some subterranean nests? Mayxac (talk) 23:12, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Colony cycle

Under what circumstances does a new colony form? It might also be beneficial to discuss the conditions of the environment they live in and how it allows queens to not need to overwinter. Also, how long do colonies typically live for? Mayxac (talk) 23:12, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Kin selection

It might be better to move the cyclical oligogyny section earlier in the article or elaborate more on it the first time it is mentioned because it is used in the “Cooperation” and “Genetic related within colonies” sections before it is explained. Mayxac (talk) 23:12, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review

The article provides an extensive overview of the wasp species. There were a few problems with sentence structure, but other than that most of the errors I corrected had to do with punctuation. I suggest adding another sentence or two at least to the Distribution and Habitat section, since it may lack the depth necessary for a good article. Moreover, the article is well referenced and neutral in tone, so the biggest benefits to its success as a good article I feel will come from more concisely framing the information in the entry. Overall, good job! VGurusamy (talk) 23:33, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review

I thought that overall the article was well written and the information was well organized. I changed wording and added links wherever I thought it would make things more clear. I also added information on cyclical oligogyny in the introduction because it is mentioned before it is defined which is confusing. You could improve the article by including a visual of the nest, since the article describes a unique nest structure which is hard to visualize. Other than that I thought topics discussed were thorough! Micah.Steinbrecher (talk) 20:29, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

Suggestions

Overall a very informative article! I have a few suggestions for you. In "Predation and pest control", you use P. tabidus a lot within the paragraph. Maybe you can just say "The workers" to start off this sentence "P. tabidus workers can also act as predators, especially toward competitors for desired food sources." One thing to clarify is "The nests of P. tabidus are relatively small, especially when compared to its Old World relative Polybioides melainus." What is the size of Polybioides melainus? Are there specific numbers you can give for the size of P. tabidus to show how small it is? Setoiris (talk) 00:20, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Class Comments/Suggestions

Under the taxonomy section, I changed the hyperlink that was attached to Polybia bucula because it only linked to the Polybia genus page, which is not helpful for your wasp species. I also recommend removing the hyperlink you added to the “Common Fiscal” because it led to a Wikipedia page that did not contain useful information for understanding your article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_fiscal). Consider explaining your point of relatedness more clearly under the ‘Worker control and policing’ section. I was confused by the statement, “workers are more related to their own sons than to the queen’s sons” and its relevance to the final point that workers care more for the queen’s sons. I changed grammatical errors throughout the paper. Jazdeb (talk) 22:24, 20 November 2014 (UTC)