Talk:Wasp/Archive 1

Wasp Allergies

I think it would help with this article if it had some sort of reference to allergies.

This page needs a lot more information

Social & sex behaviour, etc, etc. Also it would be nice to mention wasps' practical use in human society. I found an interesting article about "sniffer wasps" (narcotics & explosive detection), and I added it to the external links. But it would be nice to see a section in the main article devoted to the subject. Edit: Oh thanks a lot, "Ohnoitsjamie" for removing the link. I'm adding it back.

It would also help to add some information allergies related to wasp stings.

I would also like someone to explain to me if wasps can still sting after death. I trapped one under a glass outside; it is now dead. Without testing on myself, I would like to know if it is still capable of stinging.

It would be a miracle if a wasp could sting you after it died, just like the old tale about rattlesnakes biting after they're dead. It might take a few hours for the venom to dry up, but that's just common sense. Dyanega (talk) 20:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Ethnonym

Is it also an acronym for "White Anglo-Saxon Protestant", or am I Wrong? --G

Yeah. I'd put it under WASP which is how it's usually written. user:sjc

I thought, though I may be wrong, that it was originally WASPS - White Anglo-Saxon Protestant Settler, but the S sometimes disappears because people think the 's' was to make it plural, not part of the acronym. STÓD/ÉÍRE 03:01 Apr 10, 2003 (UTC)

Never heard of that form, at least not in the US. People going West were more likely to be called "pioneers" than "settlers", and much of the use of WASP was to distinguish the city-dwelling descendants of the English from Irish, Italians, Jews, and other undesirables :-), and "settler" would have been nonsensical in that context. Perhaps WASPS was used in Africa or Australia?? Stan 03:15 Apr 10, 2003 (UTC)

No. It was meant to refer to an American elite descended from the first settlers and so predate later waves of emigration. STÓD/ÉÍRE 03:23 Apr 10, 2003 (UTC)

It's certainly a possible etymology, but for instance my English ancestor that arrived in the 1860s would have been considered a WASP, and not, say, the 17th century settlers of the southern colonies who were Catholics. Presumably somebody has researched this already though. Stan 05:07 Apr 10, 2003 (UTC)

BTW Google on '"white anglo-saxon protestant" baltzell' shows quite a few citations of the term having been coined by E. Digby Baltzell in the early 1960s, and just as WASP. Stan 05:13 Apr 10, 2003 (UTC)

Layout

Of course, the best way to make the image fit better would be to fill up that space to the left of it with info. <g> -- John Owens 05:33 Apr 10, 2003 (UTC)

Phylogeny reference

The best online treatment of Hymenoptera phylogeny found so far is this description of the Order HYMENOPTERA. Paragraphs 3,4, and 5 detail the the Symphyta and the Apocrita.--azwaldo

Wasp images

1. I used the newer image markup for the drinking wasp image thinking it would help with the problem that the horizontal rules draw right thru it (on my browser, anyway); it didn't help. So whichever.
2. I added a wasp building a nest. I have no idea what kind of wasp. If anyone can identify it or suggest a better place for the photo, I'd be delighted to hear. I tried reading thru existing assorted wasp articles, including Yellowjacket, Paper wasp, Vespid, which seemed like possibilities, but I just don't know. Elf | Talk 22:36, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

It's a Polistes wasp.Pollinator 02:13, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Incidently the photo is rotated 90 degrees from the correct orientation. The "stem" of the nest should be at the top. Pollinator 02:16, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thanks! You're good! And that is the correct orientation, interestingly enough. It's trying to build a nest between two upright studs on my back porch, dagnabbit. Elf | Talk 02:23, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I have removed one image (the rolling .gif image) and added a new one showing in anatomical detail the basic morphology of a female yellow jacket wasp. This was done because Wikipedia is not a source for clipart or pictures and there are only so many pictures nessessary before they start to show the same over and over again, without adding any extra detail. So I have sacraficed some of the similar or poor quality pictures of wasps in favour of one which labels all the different parts. I also believe the rolling gif also contains copyrighted images ripped from goggle. I know this because i came across them when i was doing my research for my diagram - . Over the next few days I'll be adding a lot more scientific, trivia and general information to this article. It really stands a good chance of being a featured article! Lets do what we can to put this on the front page! --WikipedianProlific^(Talk) 17:26, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I propose we delete the picture of the wasp where 'you can see the fine hairs' although its nice, its not as good as the other photos and you can see the fine hairs in the syrup photo 194.83.140.31 16:55, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Scientific classification consistency

The scientific classification charts on wasp, hornet, and yellowjacket are not consistent, making it impossible to compare how closely related these insects are. I am not familiar enough with them to make the correction. --zandperl 04:15, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Aliens

I removed the following because is seems like total speculation and provides no source:

Wasps are probably the inspiration for the titular creatures of the Alien series of films. This form of predation is also seen in the Black Arms from the Sega video game Shadow the Hedgehog.

Ashmoo 01:45, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Added entire reproduction section, pushing towards GA status.

One of my major updates to this article other than the addition of a diagram is this section. I'm not a big wasp biologist though so there may be inacuracies, if nessessary changes are most welcome. I will also be adding additional sections for this article. Hopefully we can get it nominated for front page status. Any thoughts on how to go about that are probably best put here. --WikipedianProlific^(Talk) 18:08, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

The queen

She is rather the reproductive element of the colony as all members of the colony are theoretically direct genetic descendents of the queen. This could do with some explanation. Theoretically, but not actually? Whose theory is this, and why are wasps affected by it? Henry^Flower 16:12, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't feel confident making the edit myself as i'm not 100% sure but I believe it relates to the idea that some colonies deliberately keep several queens (seperated from each other) so that if one dissapears/dies/loses the ability to reproduce etc. the others can continue to produce an influx of workers to the colony rapidly without the need to make an 'emergency queen'. Its possible therefore that a colony comprising of several queens might not be genetically identical. Consider equally that as in humans, I imagine wasps are just as subject to minor genetic variation through translational errors, mutation, trisomies, polyploid errors etc. as to mean that not all offspring of the queen can be considered direct genetic descendents, even though by and large i'm sure the utterly vast majority of the colony is an indentical copy of their queen right down to the base pair sequences. --WikipedianProlific^(Talk) 00:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

How to not get stung if a person wants to drive off a wasp

Do you think it fits in the encyclopedia, a section regarding human behaviour on how to act to not get stung by a wasp?

I wonder what wasps get attracted to on a human, or generally all things that could attract a wasp from a distant location [ie. if a wasp can smell its surroundings, like sweat(partly water) and salt, dead skin... I'm not sure about this, even if I've seen something that looked like wasps flying around water on the ground]

Logictheo 08:56, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Queen

Towards the end of the summer the female wasps begin to run out of stored sperm to fertilize more eggs. These eggs develop into fertile males and fertile female queens.
I'm pretty sure this is wrong... IMO:

1. the queen can control if it lays a fertilized egg or an unfertilized one
2. a new queen develops from a fertilized eqq--Laur2ro | Talk 10:23, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Gah. Tried to revert it by clicking undo, but only seemed to make it worse. So I manually erased the text of it, but it seems to have messed up the edit links. Think I need to read up on the formatting and interface before I try that again. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.117.209.196 (talk) 06:49, 13 December 2006 (UTC).

New study rewrites evolutionary history

"These findings contradict an earlier model of vespid wasp evolution, which placed the groups together in a single lineage with a common ancestor." [1] Brian Pearson 22:36, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Please note that this is about vespid wasps, not wasps in general; I have placed the link on the Vespid page, accordingly. Dyanega 22:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Aspect that needs amplification

Many of the greatest advances in agricultural biological pest control involve wasps. The article needs much more than a passing mention of this. If no one does it, I'll eventually give it a try, although my Wikipedia time is quite limited. Pollinator 02:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I have a text book which mentions this at some depth which I will endeavour to dig up. I agree it certainly needs expanding. Much of the current content could be mentioned on other more species specific pages, however this is one of the things that could really do with a place here. WikipedianProlific^(Talk) 02:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Might I suggest, then, that any such information be placed preferentially in the parasitic wasp article, which already does discuss this to some degree; look, for example, at the bee page, and note how the sections on honey bee, bumblebee and such are very brief, mostly serving to direct readers to the main articles elsewhere. There are many, many levels between a species page, and the wasp page. Dyanega 04:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Nesting habits - social wasps

The first and second sentences of section 7.2 are ambiguous: "The nests of social wasps, such as yellow jackets, are first constructed by the queen and reach about the size of a walnut before sterile female workers take over construction. The queen initially starts the nest by making a single layer or canopy and working outwards until she reaches the edges of the cavity."

I replaced the word 'they' with 'she' in the second sentence before re-reading and discovering the discrepancy.

This implies that the queen will carry on building until she reaches the boundary of the cavity despite the previous sentence stating that workers take over the building process once the nest reaches the size of a walnut. Also, I don't know what is meant by the edges of the cavity - in a roof space, for example, the implication is that over time the nest would grow to fill the entire void. 82.152.193.2 08:59, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Yellowjacket?

I'm no expert on wasps (which is why I'm here, having just found what appears to be a dead hornet in the bath!!) but I immediately became confused by the term "Yellowjacket" which I've never heard. If this is purely an American term then I feel that it should either be left out or an explanation put in for English speakers.

That is precisely why there is a disambiguation link at the top of the page. Dyanega 02:42, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

needs more info.

It would be better if this page contained more information about allergic reactions: symptoms, medicines, stingers, etc..

it needs more than just the basic description. who wants to know about a wasps reproductive cycle anyway???

vs. lizards, etc.

Perhaps add a section detailing what happens when various animals conflict. E.g., wasp vs. lizard: lizard learns lesson and does not try to eat wasp again. Jidanni 01:30, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Sawfly vs. bee/ant (settled)

"A wasp is any insect of the order Hymenoptera and suborder Apocrita that is neither bee nor ant." - in what way is a sawfly a wasp, if a bee or an ant is not? --KnightMove (talk) 12:54, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

A sawfly is not in the suborder Apocrita, so it is not a wasp. That's exactly why membership in Apocrita is specified. Dyanega (talk) 21:46, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I got that wrong, sorry. So, a Wood wasp is not a wasp per definition? Who defined this? --KnightMove (talk) 08:24, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

It's defined largely by common usage, with some exceptions. Wood wasps are a type of sawfly, for example. "Sawfly" is the more inclusive category, and "wood wasps" are a specific subset of that category. It doesn't have to make sense, because it's based on "common names", which rarely make sense (unfortunately). After all, sawflies aren't flies... Dyanega (talk) 20:27, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Surely there is a better definition than "not a bee or an ant"? Is an ant just "not a bee or a wasp"? and a bee simply "not a wasp or an ant"? ... all of course being Apocrita. Abtract (talk) 17:22, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

"Ant" and "bee" are natural groups and defined by taxonomy; ants are all members of the Formicidae; bees are all members of the Anthophila. "Wasp", however, is a definition that does NOT follow taxonomic boundaries, because it excludes ants and bees - in the jargon of systematics, the name "wasp" defines a paraphyletic group. Remember the term "reptile"? It was defined as "any amniotes except birds and mammals" - same basic principle, also paraphyletic. Neither "wasp" nor "reptile" thus defines a natural group, but the terms are familiar and in common use, so the technical-minded among us have to bite the bullet and accept the necessity of perpetuating the terms. So it goes. Dyanega (talk) 17:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for a thoughtful response. Abtract (talk) 18:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, but my question still awairs answer: Who defined wasp in the described way? My reason to ask: In German, the respective term Wespe is also used for most sawfly species, while in common usage people assign the term to yellowjackets only. There is no clear "definition". So, if here is a definition that an insect is a wasp if and only if it belongs to Apocrita except bees and ants, someone must have defined it this way. Who? When was it generally accepted? This is my question. --KnightMove (talk) 07:47, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

No one "defined" wasp in any particular way - it's exactly the other way around. "Wasp" is the default common name for any hymenopteran that has no other name that takes precedence. That means sawflies are generally excluded from being "wasps", as are bees and ants - and all of those are names that go back a very long way. There are no other defined sub-groups, so everything else is still just a wasp. You'll note that nowhere in the "reptile" article is any sourced history given of the definition (all it says is "From the classical standpoint"); things like that are so old and well-known that no one questions their veracity, and it's the same with "wasp". If there's anything odd going on here that requires explanation, it's that in English the term "sawfly" was adopted, but it was not in German. Dyanega (talk) 16:42, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, was absent for a while, but yet to finish it:

You said: ... "Wasp" is the default common name for any hymenopteran that has no other name that takes precedence. ...

This is exactly what I had expected. But how can you say that by default common name a velvet ant is a wasp, while a wood wasp is not?

I'd like to replace the definition in the article by yours, if you agree. --KnightMove (talk) 18:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

PS: Yes, this would mean to change the status of velvet ants and wood wasps. --KnightMove (talk) 18:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

You ask "how can you say that by default common name a velvet ant is a wasp, while a wood wasp is not?" - because "Sawfly" is a group that includes "wood wasps" as a subset. The more inclusive group name takes precedence. So, velvet ants are wasps, and wood wasps are sawflies. Just because name endings agree in German doesn't mean they will agree in English. Dyanega (talk) 18:34, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

To avoid one misunderstanding: I do not at all demand the English understanding to be the same as the German one. However I see the risk that the way to define wasp in this article is original research, contradicting Wikipedias principles, and factually incorrect.

"The more inclusive group name takes precedence." - I have to reflect on that. Assuming you are right about wood wasps in this way, still there is nothing that would make velvet ants wasps in contrast to bees or ants. All three groups are monophyletic taxons within the "wasps" with other names taking precedence in the very way you describe. --KnightMove (talk) 03:15, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't think I can make this any plainer: both taxonomy AND common names are hierarchical. The common names for Hymenopterans generally recognize a minimum of four higher categories: Sawflies, Wasps, Bees, and Ants (i.e., those are the four names that are universally recognized; you can find some texts which treat "parasitic wasp" as a separate category, or "horntails", etc.). Pick up any general entomology textbook and this is what you will see. Each of those four categories has subsets. "Wood wasps" are a subset within the "Sawfly" category, and "Velvet Ants" are a subset of the "Wasp" category. The higher category name is what takes precedence; for bees and ants, the common name IS the higher category name. In the case of wood wasps and velvet ants, the higher category name is NOT the same as the family common name. Those two happen to have common names that do not match the higher category name, because the common names are exactly that - names used by common folk, non-taxonomists, and do not reflect the true affiliations of the taxa they describe, any more than "silverfish" being a type of fish, or "woodlice" being a type of louse. Wood wasps are sawflies, not wasps, and velvet ants are wasps, not ants. The most common work used by non-taxonomists in the United States, the Peterson Field Guide to Insects, lists the order Hymenoptera as "Sawflies, Ichneumons, Chalcids, Ants, Wasps, and Bees". Within those categories, wood wasps are listed under sawflies, and velvet ants are listed under wasps. That is ALWAYS the case, in any reference work you examine. The Wikipedia article therefore uses the term wasp in the broadest, most generally understood way. Dyanega (talk) 18:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Ok, this explanation did actually help to make me understand and I see that you are right. Thank you. --KnightMove (talk) 21:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Stings: treatment, coping, etc.

I'm not the only person who came to this page hoping for information (or a link to a website with information) on actually treating wasp-stings.

I would appreciate at least sub-scientific information, and no, I don't mean treating the allergic reactions (of the 3% of population prone to them ... addressed in the medical literature) but just treating the venom, effects, etc.

Since over 90% of all wasps cannot sting, it would be inappropriate to emphasize this aspect in this article. You'll note that the external links do give two websites, and that there are articles for bee sting and stinger, the latter appearing linked on this page right near the top, where people like you can see it and click on it. That's what wikilinks are there for, so any given article does not have to contain every conceivable bit of information, but instead takes you to other articles that discuss the details. Dyanega (talk) 16:06, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

/*Wasp Sting,treatment, coping, */:

Two days back I was stung by a wasp. The wasp variety was yellow mouth and brick body. Very bright and attractive in looks. It bit me on my nose. I did not do what to do. It pained very badly. I thought the pain will subside in some time. Soon water dripped from my nose. It continued. I did not consult the doctor thinking it was normal to have the reaction from my system to the sting. By evening I was sneezing and water dripping continuously from my nose, hoping that I will be alright and it had been raining outside making it impossible for me to go to doctor. Morning got up with very heavy head and ache. Alarmed by my condition I went to casualty of a hospital. My condition was deteriorating but I was confident that I will be taken care of. Doctors acted very fast gave me injections effcarlin 100mg, Avil, and lasix. The body reacted to medicines. There were four siezures during a period of 2 hours. Emergency was tackled by putting me on oxygen and other support systems. My speech got affected, however, finally, I came out of this after another one hour.

I am convalesing in my home now with no additional medicines. My advise would be to consult the doctors immediately after a wasp stings. This experience has changed my earlier opinion that wasp sting does not need medical attention, as there are different varieties of wasps. The one that bit me was much more poisonous than the common yellow colored wasp.

Usha Krishna (India, New Delhi) ushaster@gmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.178.218.215 (talk) 08:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Drilling sound

Mention the drilling or boring sound that some wasps make when drilling holes in wood, and how they make it. Jidanni (talk) 06:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I suspect you're not thinking of wasps at all, but carpenter bees. Dyanega (talk) 07:43, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Got them too here in Taiwan, but nope, I'm talking about the nastiest stretch limo yellow jacket striped F-16 bomber deal. Jidanni (talk) 13:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Then you're probably talking about pulp-harvesting behavior, which is scraping, not drilling. Hornets and paper wasps press their jaws against the wood and buzz, using the vibrations to scrape loose tiny shavings of wood. By regurgitating water into the shavings, they make wood pulp, which is added to their nest and becomes paper. If this belongs in any article, it is the Paper wasp article, not here: 99% of all wasp species do not make paper. Dyanega (talk) 23:43, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

London Wasps

Where are we? Wasps FC (talk) 10:32, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Who are "we"? London Wasps? They're listed on Wasp (disambiguation), which is linked at the top of the article. --McGeddon (talk) 10:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

References and citations

This article has NONE, still. It needs in text citations to back the facts and reliable references and sources for where all this information came from. Mfield (talk) 04:21, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Main picture

Why does it have a moth? Theoretically, if I had no idea how a wasp looked, I wouldn't know which one the wasp was. I suggest swapping this for a more descriptive pic. Cribananda (talk) 00:28, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Done, if somewhat late.--Atlan (talk) 19:25, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

"parasitic wasps are the most diverse and common type of wasp; photo should reflect this - Ichnuemonidae is the largest family, so let's use an ichneumon" -Dyanega @ 23:44, 31 March 2010

FYI this change (pictured on the left) was replaced by the picture on the right with the edit summary captioned. While Dyanega's argument has some merit, I think the majority of readers will probably be coming to this page looking for the yellow kind of wasps though, and I support Atlan's image to the one on the right. –xeno^talk 15:00, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Atlan's image

This was not on my watchlist, so very late reply. I obviously also favor the one I added earlier, which is more easily identifiable as a wasp. I think to the average reader, the picture on the right could just as well be any other flying insect. There is no rule on Wikipedia that the largest family of a type of animal gets to be the main image.--Atlan (talk) 23:00, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I agree with this change. Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

parasitism wasps

Can anyone tell me what kind of wasp it is that puts her fertilized eggs into the egg of a undeveloped caderpillar? As the caderpillar grows, the wasp larvae grow feeding of it. the caderpillar stays alive until the wasp larvae make their way out through its "skin" . it then dies. i saw this on video in school but dont know who it was by so now im trying to find out what kind of wasp it was and how i can get some information on it. thanks for your help79.246.96.250 (talk) 20:03, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

New behavior

i just observed a yellow jacket collect moisture from the air. Now what do i do? Well im gonna try and contact someone now. OAA —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.81.126.252 (talk) 20:37, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Social wasp reproductive cycle

"Wasps do not reproduce via mating flights like bees. Instead social wasps reproduce between a fertile queen and male wasp; in some cases queens may be fertilized by the sperm of several males."

I think that bees also reproduce between a fertile queen and a male or several male bees.

Unlike honey bee queens, wasp queens typically live for only one year. Also queen wasps do not organize their colony or have any raised status and hierarchical power within the social structure. They are more simply the reproductive element of the colony and the initial builder of the nest in those species which construct nests.

Afaik, queen bees also "do not organize their colony or have any raised status and hierarchical power within the social structure. They are more simply the reproductive element of the colony and the initial builder of the nest in those species which construct nests"; yes, the article does not say the opposite, but the way the information is presented (talking about that after mentioning a difference between bee queens and wasp queens), gives the impression that they do.--81.84.51.161 (talk) 14:40, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Lacuna

Something is missing between the following two sentences: "Towards the end of the summer, the queen begins to run out of stored sperm to fertilize more eggs. These eggs develop into fertile males and fertile female queens." Orthotox (talk) 20:21, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

B-Class criteria checklist

The following checklist is posted with the intent of determining whether this article meets the six B-Class criteria:

References

Is the article is suitably referenced, with inline citations? Does it have has reliable sources, and any important or controversial material which is likely to be challenged?

Scope

Does the article reasonably cover the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies? Does it contain a large proportion of the material necessary for an A-Class article, although some sections may need expansion, and some less important topics may be missing?

Layout and organization

Does the article has a defined structure? Is the content organized into groups of related material, including a lead section and all the sections that can reasonably be included in an article of its kind?

Well written

Is the article reasonably well-written? Does the prose contain no major grammatical errors and flows sensibly?

Supporting materials

Does the article contain supporting materials where appropriate? Illustrations? Diagrams? Infobox?

Understandable

Does the article present its content in an appropriately understandable way? Is it is written with as broad an audience in mind as possible? Does the article incorrectly assume unnecessary technical background OR are technical terms explained or avoided where possible.

Input anyone?

  Bfpage |leave a message  02:21, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Quick note

"Megascolia procer, a giant solitary species from Java in the Scoliidae. This specimen's length is 7.7 cm and its wingspan is 11.5 cm."

Shouldn't this species be mentioned in the lead and diversity sections as the largest wasp? Is it really that big too? What source says this? The article on the Russian wiki says they are much smaller, and thus a specimen measured at 7.7 cm would be impossible. Burklemore1 (talk) 13:18, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Whether it's the very largest I couldn't say; other Megascolia may be as large or bigger. I've added a citation to a paper which shows a figure with a measurement scale that confirms the stated size. There are different subspecies and several related species, so the Russian measurement may refer to one of these. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:02, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the clarification. I didn't notice the figure in the photograph, but it's still odd a specimen is that big. I guess a future revision would be needed to add further information about this. I noticed you didn't add a notes section despite adding a note for the image, but I have fixed this. Other than my concern, this article is looking nice in comparison to what it was previously. Do you have the intention to bring it up to GA level? Burklemore1 (talk) 03:42, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

I found a paper which confirms the size, and added it as a ref; the "Mega" in the scientific name might be a clue, too. And yes, we have that intention. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Good stuff. I am positive that the name might be a clue; fossilised Titanomyrma queens are the largest ants discovered (and perhaps the largest hymenopteran ever), and they have "Titan" in their name which suggests its enormous size. I see the GA is collaborative; I have found that Austeucharis myrmeciae (a wasp) was the first recorded eucharitid parasite of an ant, with Myrmecia forficata larvae being its host. Thought you may find that interesting and/or could put it in use for the article, unless you have other intentions. Burklemore1 (talk) 08:24, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

There are already some refs in Eucharitidae on similar behaviour in other wasp species, so it seems the family has specialised in ants. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:59, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Seems to specalise with ants only it seems. Well, best of luck with the article. Burklemore1 (talk) 11:47, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Good job

Well done guys for getting this article to GA status. It's good to see important articles such as this one getting promoted to GA, and it's also good to see the insect field on Wikipedia is getting the attention it deserves. Burklemore1 (talk) 11:29, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:01, 8 August 2015 (UTC)