Talk:Two-spotted bumble bee

Insects Stub‑class Low‑importance

	Insects portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Insects, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of insects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InsectsWikipedia:WikiProject InsectsTemplate:WikiProject InsectsInsects
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I will be expanding this article for a behavioral ecology class.Xerylium (talk) 20:08, 30 September 2015 (UTC)Xerylium[reply]

Peer Review

Nice job on this article. The right hand box is very informative and I appreciate that you took the time to find a picture, distribution map, and the conservation status. I changed a few words in the overview section to cut down on repetition, and I also added a sentence that was previously in the taxonomy and phylogeny section (about names). I moved the first sentence of the taxonomy and phylogeny section to the identification section since I think it is more relevant there. The taxonomy and phylogeny section could also use some more information about the genus, family, etc. and what characterizes each of these divisions.

Good job on the identification as well as the distribution and habitat sections. I like the detail you used and the pictures are very helpful. Colony cycle also has good information, but try and split up the text into two or more subsections. I rearranged a couple more sentences in the foraging section as well as the predators section to make everything easier to read. I would also advise adding more information to the phoresy section. HBrodke (talk) 15:40, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review 2

Overall this article was very well written. I only added a hyperlink to Gelsemium sempervirens. Other than that I did not see anything that needed to be drastically improved. Good job.VAD2015 (talk) 06:34, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Edits and comments

This is a really well written article. It contains helpful pictures and some very interesting information on the bee species. I particularly enjoyed the section on male incubation and interaction with other species. Honestly, there aren’t many things to be changed in the article. Nonetheless, in order to make it even better, I think it could use more information in the “Mating” subsection under the “Behavior” section. Additionally, even though the current general overview is good, it could also use some expansion since there are many interesting facts about the species in the article that could hook the readers. Overall, great job!!KimCourtney (talk) 21:28, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review

I was impressed with the amount of research you did to learn about this bee. The range map and images were all very helpful in adding a visual element to the article so that it was not all text. The images were especially helpful in the identification and distribution/habitat section. The facts within the article were also well cited, and well linked throughout. In the colony cycle section, you can also consider moving the last paragraph to the beginning of the section to serve as an ‘introduction’ to the topic of colonies, and then go into more detail about how the queens start the nest and how the eggs and offspring develop. Overall I was not able to find much to edit – the writing was clear and I could not find any grammatical errors or minor edits that were not already noted by other peer reviewers. The external links page was also helpful to give more visual aids that you might not be able to include on the Wikipedia page or Wikicommons. Overall great work and I hope you can get a good article status on this, or others keep expanding on this species! Chtsai016 (talk) 05:53, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]