Talk:Worker policing/Archive 1

Introduction
Hi all, if you are viewing the article or have something to add, please feel free to leave comments or edits. I appreciate the feedback and help! GenesBrainsBehaviorNeuroscienceKL (talk) 17:48, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review and Recommendations
This is a great start to an article on worker policing. It was thorough enough to give me a good idea of what exactly worker policing is, and I really liked how you gave some examples of it taking place. I edited this article for concision. In some places, I saw phrases such as "this is believed to be caused by," and I changed these simply to "is caused by." I am assuming that everything put into the article is fact so it seems redundant to include phrases like that. My only other major recommendation is that your subheadings should be expanded upon if they are to be left as subheadings. If there is not enough research to make each one a significant paragraph then I think you should take out the subheadings and just have the information under the subject heading such as Proposed Mechanisms. If you still want some subheadings, you could think of a different way to group them so that there is enough information. I would love to see more pictures too! You have some really great examples so it would be nice to see some pictures of those.E.middlebrook (talk) 21:52, 16 October 2012 (UTC)


 * For this new article, I started off by making the headings a little more concise so that users can easily navigate between them. I also worked on a couple grammatical edits to help the clarity and flow of the article. As it stands, I think your subheadings are great and will really shine once you have more information under them. As E.middlebrook mentioned, adding in pictures will help in this regard as well. Compiling sources for a proposed mechanism will also be a useful venture for you. To help connect this article with more wikipedia pages, I tried focusing on linking the page to important concepts and terminology that you were addressing. I also edited the citations so there were no lingering spaces between periods and the reference number. Overall, I think you have a great start on an interesting topic. The page is informative and clear, but just cracking the surface. Nsavalia23 (talk) 03:29, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

The grammar and style of writing look really good for this essay. The biggest suggestion I have is to add more information in the examples section. Also, discussion of Fisher's theory of a 1:1 parental investment in other organisms could be useful as a backdrop on which people can compare sexual conflict in hymenoptera. As the article stands now, the exceptions to worker policing make up a little bit too much of the article, but this could be easily fixed by adding more examples. Overall, I like the article a lot and I think it has great potential for improvement. Gabriel.hassler (talk) 04:56, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review 2
Very cool that you made your own page. Your grammar and syntax was good and understandable. I made a few very minor grammar edits. My main suggestion on how to make this page better is to simply put more information on the exceptions and proposed mechanisms. You don't have to change it, but perhaps more explanation and another study if it is out there would help a lot. I think you did a good job explaining worker policing and if I didn't know what it was this page would give me some good, general information. Katims90 (talk) 18:43, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Peer review
Great job! I think that this page really does a service to wikipedia in giving a lot of great introductory information on working policing. While beginning the article with the evolutionary basis section is very logical and provided a good framework for worker policing, I think that the next section should be proposed mechanisms rather than examples. Also, in the article there are a few pictures included, however they don't match up with the section in which the subjects of the photos are discussed. I'm not sure how to move the pictures around, but I think that this could be positive for the article and the examples that you provide. For the proposed mechanisms section, it could be beneficial for you to explain the mechanisms not in the specific context of the studies you cite. Overall, great job! Samara levine (talk) 20:04, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review
Your article gives a good idea of what worker policing is, some mechanisms for how it happens, and some very interesting examples. I agree that the example section should come after the mechanisms such as that will give your reader some idea of how it happens before learning about what that would look like in the wild. Your headings are all very clear as is your sentence structure and grammar. I only made a few minor edits for words choice, and I also added some links to other wikipedia pages that your readers might find useful. Since this is a page on a behavior rather than a species, I am not sure what else needs to be done to get it to good article standing. You might try going to other pages of species and linking them back to this article. You could also consider adding some more pictures. Besides that the article seems very thorough without being overly wordy or having excess information. E.middlebrook (talk) 00:01, 27 November 2012 (UTC)