Talk:Andrena agilissima

Untitled

As part of a class project I added to this article. The top part of the article was left alone along with the picture and taxonomy on the side. I added sections on Description, Distribution, Habitat, Behavior sections, Diet and Parasites.Tefrancis (talk) 04:09, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

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): Tefrancis. Peer reviewers: Paanur, AddyShak.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 17:16, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Peer Review

I found this article descriptive, and I liked that the language is accessible to all readers. I also liked that, for vocabulary that did not have a link, you offered a brief description. I especially liked the description of the parasites at the end of the article.My first suggestion is that you reconsider the information in the introduction. While you did a good job of offering broad information on the bee species, it is usually helpful to add an interesting fact about the bee that distinguishes it in the readers' minds. I added a link to oligolecty. I would have liked you to expand a bit on the term "Earth walls", such as the substrate. I'm generally confused by the phrase that it impacts the bee's "cuckoo bee", if you could expand on the importance of the "cuckoo bee". I also inserted the "by whom" template where phrases like "It has been thought" were used. I would rewrite the first sentence under size dimorphism, those two thoughts don't seem connected to me. Other than these suggestions, I just made some changes to spelling errors. Great job on the article!Flynnt2013 (talk) 06:16, 6 December 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review

I found this to be an interesting article, given that this specific bee had features that I hadn’t seen in other species, such as having two types of parasites and specific female-female interaction. In order to help better this paper, I focused on clarifying specific terms, such as oligolectic and what it means to have a skewed sex ratio. Even though I had learned some of these terms during class, I myself was slightly confused when reading portions of the paper, and aimed to rephrase and redefine specific portions in order to enhance the comprehension of the reader at whether they are a beginner or an expert. I also tried to focus on clarifying the grammar of this page, given that a huge component of a strong Wikipedia page is having good grammar and flow. Overall, I enjoyed reading this paper and thought it to be very informative, but believe that certain portions required editing in order to be more as clear and thorough as possible. Paanur (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:17, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review

Very good job with the additions to this article! They helped to enrich what was already written in the article and I appreciate the work that went into it. Firstly, I reworded a few sentences so that they would read a little better in my opinion. Secondly, I changed the capitalization of some sections and subsections so that they would match the Wikipedia standards. Thirdly, I added a reference to the taxonomy and description and identification sections because there was not one present before. I would love to see the sections about diet and taxonomy expanded a bit more. However, I really enjoyed the section about parasites as it was very detailed and informative. Great job with the additions!Mebennett49 (talk) 06:32, 22 October 2015 (UTC)Mebennett49

Peer Review

Overall, good article! The behavior section was extensive and well organized, touching on many different aspects of this bee’s interactions. The diet section could be expanded, as there are currently only two sentences. As well, some of the phrasing is a bit confusing. For example, in the distribution and habitat section, “It is a typical hollow way bee.” I’m not sure what that means, and I think either rephrasing or expanding would help to clear up a lot of the information presented in this article.

I edited several aspects of the article, including grammar, spelling, organization, and structure, and content.

I fixed some spelling and grammar, such as adding the word “and the” in the taxonomy section between the family and subfamily name. As I wrote above, some of the phrasing should be clarified; I didn’t make many edits in this scenario.

Structurally, I deleted the section that was titled Introduction and instead made it the introduction (without a section header). I also included phylogeny in the taxonomy section and combined description and identification into one single section, and put diet and parasites in the same general category titled “Interaction with other species.” I also went through and added a lot of hyperlinks to important words and phrases, in case the reader wants to learn more about certain topics. Examples include the term “oligolectic” and the plant family “Brassicaceae” from the description sub-section.

Kevin.george1 (talk) 23:26, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review Comments

Good job on this article! The pictures are great and make the page quite visually appealing. I did move one picture to the left side of the page at the nesting behavior section to add variety. I also added information about the order in the taxonomy and phylogeny section to make it longer and more complete. As for smaller changes, I changed some phrasing throughout the article and tried to rework the sentences where you say ‘it seams’ to add more confidence to the information. I also took out the ‘usefulness of nests’ section since there was only one sentence there and I think the information works well in the overall nest section. Lastly I added some links to other pages and took out links to pages that don’t exist.

Future editing on this article should consider adding a distribution map, making the introductory section longer and more encompassing, and adding a few more sections (like colony cycle). Wonderful work so far though! HBrodke (talk) 18:12, 26 November 2015 (UTC)

Comments

I went through and made some grammatical and punctuation edits, as well as some sentence structure changes. Overall, there was a lot of good information in your article, but I felt like it was unnecessarily wordy. You might consider going through and cutting some stuff out that I missed! Also, there were some sections that were a little unclear. For example, the section on Female-Female aggression is a little confusing and certain parts are not cited at all. Finally, I would go through every section and make sure the facts you include are all relevant to the headings. In the female-female aggression section again, you mention division of labor. While this is important and interesting information, it's not relevant to the heading and would be better under a different heading. (Mpmaz (talk) 22:01, 1 December 2015 (UTC))

Peer Review

There is a lot of great information in this article! I went through and added links to other articles that readers might find helpful such as Fabricus and abdominal tergites. I also removed the repetitive links because the Wikipedia style guidelines say to only link a page once rather than throughout the article. As far as formatting goes, I moved the picture of “Andrena agilissima from above” near the size dimorphism section so the Interaction with other species heading wasn’t awkwardly separated from its content. Like another reviewer said, I think a distribution map would help illustrate the Distribution and habitat heading more as well as adding sections such as colony cycle and role differentiation. Some of the sentences are a bit choppy, but overall it is an easy read. (Shelly May (talk) 23:04, 1 December 2015 (UTC))

Peer Review

This article was very well written and thorough in the information it gave. I corrected some grammar mistakes and changed some of the sentence structure to allow the article to flow better. I would suggest including a range map to give readers a better visual idea as to where the bee is located in the world. The multiple pictures were very helpful in seeing the bee and its multiple behaviors. Vsalazar258 (talk) 21:47, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review

I really enjoyed reading your article, especially the subsections under Behavior and Interactions With Other Species. I made some minor fixes in regards to syntax, grammar, and capitalization. Perhaps adding more hyperlinks throughout your article could increase reader traffic. Other than that, I found the article to be rather informative and had a myriad of photos that vividly depicted the description and behavior of the bee. Thanks for your work!AddyShak (talk) 00:36, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Peer Review

Good work with this article, I found it very easy to read and the information kept me interested throughout. I made a few small grammatical changes having to do with commas and fixed some redundancies. I think the pictures that are included aid in the flow of the article. I think it would be good to add a range map in the taxonomy box, as well as any further information that could be added there such as the conservation status of this species. Wdsieling (talk) 01:23, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Andrena agilissima. 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/20110324074231/http://www.tierundnatur.de:80/wildbienen/eb-aagil.htm to http://www.tierundnatur.de/wildbienen/eb-aagil.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 02:42, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Andrena agilissima. 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/20111103025714/http://www.faunaeur.org/distribution_table.php to http://www.faunaeur.org/distribution_table.php
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tierundnatur.de/wildbienen/eb-aagil.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 05:32, 5 July 2017 (UTC)