Talk:Tetragonisca angustula

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): HBrodke. Peer reviewers: Mebennett49, Xerylium, Danakes6, Kulshrestha51, AddyShak.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Plans to Edit
Hello! I will be editing this page and adding more references throughout the next few months for my behavioral ecology class. I would like the status of the page to move up from a Stub article to B or GA status. I appreciate any feedback and help you have to offer. HBrodke (talk) 17:39, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review
I appreciate the amount of hard work and research that went into this article, particularly in the “Behavior” section. Great job! I made a few edits, though the article already provides a great overview of T. angustula. To start, I made a few edits to the capitalization of the headings in order to comply with Wikipedia standards. I added some additional page links in hopes of increasing traffic to the article, specifically Hymenoptera, Meliponini, eusociality, and a few others. I changed the punctuation in some areas (e.g. putting “%” instead of “percent”) to reduce unnecessary verbosity. Moreover, I changed the wording of a few sentences so that they were easier for me to read and comprehend. I’d love to see some more information on nest mate recognition. How specifically does T. angustula recognize its nest mates? Overall, well done! Mebennett49 (talk) 01:46, 30 September 2015 (UTC)Mebennett49

Peer Review 2
This was a great and thorough article! I rearranged the overview paragraph, moving the other names that it is called to the beginning of the paragraph in case those names are helpful in someone identifying if this was the article they were looking for. I also reworded portions of that paragraph for clarity and grammar. Throughout the article I made minor changes to sentence structure and word choice to make the article as clear and flowing as possible. I also switched the Nursing and Mating section because it seemed that nursing came before and at the end of the mating section, oviposition is mentioned as coming before and the Nursing section begins with oviposition. Those were the major changes that I made. --Danakes6 (talk) 05:48, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review 3
This is a fantastic article and it clearly required a lot of hard work and research! I enjoyed learning about the context of Tetragonisca angustula with respect to its relations with humans. I don't know how detailed the research on this particular bee is, but I think the article would benefit from a more detailed description of the colony cycle. For my part, I corrected a few typos/grammatical mistakes, and I cleaned up an awkward sentence that referred to research which was clearly cited in the first place. My major change was to add several links within the article to other wikipedia articles in order to elucidate its content and make it less isolated from the overall Wikipedia encyclopedia. I hope my changes helped! Great job! Kulshrestha51 (talk) 01:54, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

Comments on your article
Hi! I absolutely loved reading your article.

As I read through it, I noticed that you were very specific and there was an obviously immense amount of research done beforehand. Notably, your behavior section had an array of information that really characterized the bee for the reader. I could not really find any major errors or even minor editing (I believe what could have been corrected before has already been corrected by the above peers). Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia; it was phenomenal work!AddyShak (talk) 20:15, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review 5
In the Taxonomy section, I could find not find supporting evidence in the citated reference that T. angustula is named for the genus. Also, 'Trigona' is a separate genus. Was this bee first categorized to be in the 'Trigona' genus and then moved? I am unsure as the reference does not confirm what you have written, so I deleted it.

For the Description section, you do not have enough information about this bee. You would not be able to distinguish it from other bees in the Meliponini tribe. Also, how would you distinguish between males and females?

I moved the sentence describing cerumen from the Nest building section to the Swarming section so that cerumen is described when it is first mentioned rather than later on in the article.

In the Nursing section, sealing an egg is not unique behavior to this bee. It's pretty common among Hymenopteran insects. Also, are there specific nurse bees? They are mentioned a few times, but I believe you just meant workers so I fixed it. If not, please add more detail about them and list them as another type of this bee in the Description section and Nursing section.

For the Nest defense section, do the soldiers ever switch duties? Or do they only do one type of defense their entire lives?

You have a section on Environmental concerns, but it seems more broad and not very related to this bee. Though T. angustula is very important as you say, you do not state any evidence for its decline. As this bee can live in man-made structures, is it being negatively affected?

This article could use a basic distribution map to help visualize where this bee can be found. Overall, I fixed spelling and grammar. I also made sure to italicize the names of species and genus. In addition I added internal links. Xerylium (talk) 20:56, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Hey! Good job on the article! I thought that your article was well written. It was concise and straight to the point. I particularly liked how you seemed to get information about a lot of different things about your bee. It showed in how you were able to explain every role for the bee in the colony. I just made some minor edits on your article. I added some hyperlinks and edited some of the grammatical mistakes. Otherwise, I didn't think there were many places that the article needed improvement. One thing you could try to do is find a map of the distribution map for the bee. I think it would be interesting to see for the readers because the bee is one of the most common in Central and South America.

Matthewkim93 (talk) 04:16, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Final Contribution Comments
Great job on your article! I was really impressed in the amount of sections and pictures within your article. I especially impressed by how you separated the "Nursing" section based on the caste and sex of the bees. There was a lot of detail included in that section that was very interesting. I went through your page did some minor editing of some grammar and also tried to rewrite some sentences to ensure that the page flowed well. I would recommend reading over your page and continue to make edits that make the article concise and clear. The only section that I would recommend doing some more research on is the "Colony Cycle." There is a significant amount of information that could be include. This includes the average life span of a colony and the colony forming process. I would also consider including a picture that could explain the geographic distribution of the bee. Including a distribution image could be very beneficial for readers as it could lead to their better understanding. But overall I was extremely impressed with your page and keep up the good work! Helenaxeros (talk) 00:05, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

The article is fantastic! The introduction was very well written, and it contained information that highlighted the importance of this specific bee, which captures the reader's attention well. Some of the changes I made included grammatical changes or subject and noun agreement. I also added links, such as a link for the term "oviposition". Additionally, I changed some sentence structures to make the information more fluid. I was very impressed by the diversity of information in this article, such as the extensive section on Honey. My final suggestion is that you add more pictures if possible. Great job! Flynnt2013 (talk) 05:35, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Wow Hannah! The article is great, you are great, everything is just great. This article touches on an incredible diversity of topics. It truly provides an all around holistic view of this eusocial stingless bee. I only had to change a couple of things. In the “Human importance” paragraph, I took out the introduction to the study (including the year and study leader’s name) and replaced it with “More often than not.” I did the same underneath the “Antibacterial activity” heading, deleting the portion mentioning the study and replacing it with “yet they all exhibit some type of.” I tried to find more links but it was already linked well. Great article overall. Keep up the good work! Cratermann (talk) 10:58, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

ii. The extensive introduction for this article caught my attention immediately. I liked how much of the important, “take away” information about this bee could be found at the top of the page. I think that is an effective strategy to propagate the important information to all readers. Another section I found well-researched (and well-cited) was the information about nursing behaviors for all members of the nest. I also enjoyed reading the well-written sections under the heading “Human Importance.” The fact that your bee has antibacterial activity through its honey and propolis. Hopefully this use of the bee will help decrease the deforestation you mentioned that affects the regions this bee occupies. Finally, your article may benefit from an increased number of links to other articles to keep the information clear and aid readers who may not know what a “propolis” or “olfactory cues” really are. Overall, Mira.tbaum (talk) 17:35, 4 December 2015 (UTC)