Talk:Parachartergus fraternus

Author Comments

I have created this article for Parachartergus fraternus. I have greatly updated this page using scholarly articles as a reference. There was a great deal of information available about the venom and stinging behaviors of this species. There were also a few sources about the foraging of this species. I found most of my sources using google scholar. I have not included a picture yet but will attempt to find one and add it soon. Probertsg (talk) 01:45, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review

An amazing amount of information was presented on this article, with many detailed sections. With the amount of information and sections present, I was surprised that they were only pulled from 8 references, but still the research done seems very thorough and on point. I thought the text under each of the sections related to the respective title headings well. In terms of structure, I feel like the ‘Ovary development’ section under ‘Kin selection’ was out of place, perhaps it would fit better under ‘Behavior’ along with ‘Oophagy’? I’m not completely sure about where to suggest an alternative placement, but I do feel like a better placement of the section is possible. There were a couple of grammatical errors and formatting errors such as italicizing that I went ahead and fixed. I feel like the ‘Colony cycle’ section could be worded differently so that it flows better. Lastly, I also made revisions to the writing in the first five major sections. Sandyamuchimilli (talk) 01:42, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Review of article

This article is thorough and well written. I edited it for grammar mistakes. I also added in some hyperlinks where I thought was necessary. For example, I linked the word “peduncles” because not many people would know what that is if they are not familiar with anatomy or wasps. Add in a picture to the taxonomy box when possible. I agree with the other commenter that oophagy deals more with kin selection than behavior, so moving that section would organize the article well. Mhimmelrich (talk) 03:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review

This article was very informative, and I was very impressed by how many aspects of this wasp's behavior you managed to cover. I also enjoyed reading it - I didn't know that wasps could be predatory! I made some minor edits for clarity throughout the article, particularly in instances where the species name was mentioned. (Species names are singular, not plural, and the verb usage in the article should reflect this.) I also added in several hyperlinks for terms that I thought were not intuitively understood, such as "fusiform". I also hyperlinked "Polistinae" in order to provide readers with easy access to relevant information about this wasp. One additional suggestion for organization of the article is to move the section 'Caste indistinguishability' so that it precedes the section 'Minor caste differences'. Ruaha (talk) 05:05, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Superfluous coding

@Probertsg: I am a regular Wikipedia editor and have approved this article for DYK. Please could you remove all the html-type superfluous coding from the article so as to make it easier for other editors to edit. It would also be helpful to provide urls for the research articles cited even when only the abstract is freely available. A good way to do this is by using the template
<ref>{{cite journal |author= |year= |title= |journal= |volume= |issue= |pages= |doi= |pmid= |pmc= |url= }}</ref>. Apart from these suggestions, it is a very nice article. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:15, 20 November 2014 (UTC)