Jump to content

Talk:Bee: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
m Undid revision 977587148 by Pepe Propaganda (talk); don't alter what the cited reference says
Line 21: Line 21:


{{edit semi-protected|Bee|answered=yes}}
{{edit semi-protected|Bee|answered=yes}}
The first listed reference (the second is an older reference) of the sentence "There are nearly 20,000 known species of bees in seven recognized biological families.[1][2]", only show >20,000 bee species: "All of the >20,000 species of bees living today..." [[User:Flavonoide|Flavonoide]] ([[User talk:Flavonoide|talk]]) 14:13, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
The first listed reference (the second is an older reference) of the sentence "There are nearly 20,000 known species of bees in seven recognized biological families.[1][2]", only show >16,000 bee species: "All of the >16,000 species of bees living today..." [[User:Flavonoide|Flavonoide]] ([[User talk:Flavonoide|talk]]) 14:13, 11 February 2019 (UTC)


:{{done}}. Although the previous way was technically correct as well (over 16,000 is basically nearly 20,000), this matches the source perfectly and is more precise, so I think this would be preferred. Thanks for making the request, {{u|Flavonoide}}!--<span style="font-family: AR BERKLEY; text-shadow: 2px 5px 5px gray;">[[User:SkyGazer 512|SkyGazer 512]]</span> <sup><span style="background: linear-gradient(aqua, #d580ff);">[[User talk:SkyGazer 512|Oh no, what did I do this time?]]</span></sup> 23:58, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
:{{done}}. Although the previous way was technically correct as well (over 16,000 is basically nearly 20,000), this matches the source perfectly and is more precise, so I think this would be preferred. Thanks for making the request, {{u|Flavonoide}}!--<span style="font-family: AR BERKLEY; text-shadow: 2px 5px 5px gray;">[[User:SkyGazer 512|SkyGazer 512]]</span> <sup><span style="background: linear-gradient(aqua, #d580ff);">[[User talk:SkyGazer 512|Oh no, what did I do this time?]]</span></sup> 23:58, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 20:15, 9 September 2020

Template:Vital article

Semi-protected edit request on 11 February 2019

The first listed reference (the second is an older reference) of the sentence "There are nearly 20,000 known species of bees in seven recognized biological families.[1][2]", only show >16,000 bee species: "All of the >16,000 species of bees living today..." Flavonoide (talk) 14:13, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Although the previous way was technically correct as well (over 16,000 is basically nearly 20,000), this matches the source perfectly and is more precise, so I think this would be preferred. Thanks for making the request, Flavonoide!--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 23:58, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2019

An Austrian ethologist Carl von Frisch studied the communication language between honey bees and he was the one who invented "waggle dance". He noticed that if a bee sees a flower around 100 metres away from its home, it starts flying around that flower. If it's further than a bee starts making a shape of two rings connected by a straight line. The slower a bee dances, the further the food is located. The more excited a bee looks, the more food it has found.

DayanaAssad (talk) 12:14, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. This information is already in the article. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 17:41, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline in wild bees

Please provide something authoritative, a single scientific article which documents the decline and the debates about it, no need to document that here but the statement without the link requires some reference. Kessler (talk) 10:47, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:27, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wool Carder bees

I might be in the wrong place for this but, I was thinking about maybe starting a small article for wool carder bees as I saw there was no article withstanding at this time. Would that be a good idea or should we somehow merge a small sub-section into the main bees article? I saw there are over 16,000 species of bees so I imagine most bees species will go without articles. I might plop something on my user page. I was also just kind of seeing what general consensus was among the Wiki Bee community. PrecociousPeach (talk) 04:35, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is an article for wool carder bees, Anthidium manicatum already but there are some red links in genus Anthidium that could be worked on. WikiProject Agriculture and WikiProject Insects would be the place to discuss this I think. Rauisuchian (talk) 05:10, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Bee Subclass Pterygota

I think that it would be good to add the subclass Pterygota in the scientific classification of the bee on the sidebar. Also, the taxon Dicondylia could also be added. Since I just created my account for this change, I thought I would put this in talk instead of submitting an edit request. I also thought that since I am new to Wikipedia editing, there might be an obvious reason it is not included -- AnonymousCornCob (talk) 05:14, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That would add zero information of any relevance. All insects that are not either Archaeognatha or Zygentoma are in both Dicondylia and Pterygota. There are no articles in Wikipedia for major insect orders in these groups that includes these ranks in their visible classification, for this exact reason. If it doesn't merit inclusion in the articles for insect orders, it certain doesn't merit inclusion for a taxon as far down the hierarchy as a superfamily, and bees are an even lower rank than that. Putting this information into every article for every group of insects down to the rank of superfamily would require hundreds upon hundreds of edits. Dyanega (talk) 17:57, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]