Talk:Hemipepsis ustulata

	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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Hymenoptera task force (assessed as Low-importance).

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in Fall 2014. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Washington University in St. Louis/Behavioral Ecology (Fall 2014)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

Suggestions

Your article was through and interesting. I especially found it interesting how they paralyze tarantulas. I made a few minor grammatical edits. For the Taxonomy and Phylogeny section you might want to write short summary describing the family and genus, for example, instead of listing information that can already be found in the right-hand box. You had good details about life history. It was interesting how they lay their eggs in tarantulas after they paralyze them. In the breeding section you could add which months specifically they breed during. I put the Diet and Predators sections as subsections under one section since they are related and not long enough to justify having them as two separate sections. I found the defense section very interesting as well, especially the section on body armor. Good job on the article and including a lot of useful and detailed information. nef614 (talk) 22:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some Suggestions

Hey Alex! These are possible areas of improvement. Some are more important than others (like adding links, which is more important). Your article desperately needs some links to other articles! It is an “orphan,” since there are no links. Make a link like this: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking. Try to get as much of the jargon linked up to other articles as you can. For example, it would be nice to have a link to click for “wing venation patterns” and “instar.”

In headings, only the first word and proper nouns need to be capitalized. For all titles except “Taxonomy and phylogeny,” this needs to be changed. For example, “Size Variation and Its Behavioral and Evolutionary Consequences” should be changed to “Size variation and its behavioral and evolutionary consequences.”

You need to properly italicize your genus/species names. It’s two single quotes, not the double quote! So instead of “, it should be ‘’.

Your “Taxonomy and phylogeny” section has no citation, nor does your “Overview” or “Venom.” You should reference/cite the discussions under these headings.

You can add more to Taxonomy/Phylogeny by discussing the history of how this species was named. Who named it, and when? Were there any changes made to its name or classification over time?

For Description/Identification, if you can find the information on this you can go into a description of their anatomy, hydrocarbons, and life stages (egg, larva, pupa, adult). You can also talk about the physical features that distinguish adults, how workers differ from queens and adult males.

For Distribution/Habitat, you can include a map of their distribution, and/or compare the distribution of H. ustulata with the distribution of other local or regional wasps nearby.

For Breeding, when does the “two and a half month period” occur? What months, specifically? This factoid does not seem to stand alone without more specific dates. Also compare the longevity of males to other species if you can. The reader may not understand that living “more than one month” is exceptionally long-lived for males, assuming that that’s what you meant.

For Diet, you can be more specific about which species of tarantulas are preyed upon by H. ustulata.

Overall, cool article! It was interesting to read! :)

Carzhong (talk) 00:19, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Katie's Comments

Hey Alex, great job! This is a super interesting and in depth article! You cover a ton of ground in this article and in going through the article, I mostly made grammatical changes. I personally like the aesthetic of capitalized titles, so I did that for you. In addition, in your predation section, I changed some of the wording to make it flow better. In terms of ways to make the article even better from here, I would suggest clarifying that the species is not actually a "hawk" right away. And beyond that, I would suggest that you explain that they prey on actual tarantulas. I was very confused about this, and would have appreciated immediate clarification. In addition, further explaining how such a small species could take down a tarantula would be very helpful. Also, in your taxonomy section, I would have liked to see some discussion of close relatives and who discovered the species. As an organizational note, some of your subsections, namely Breeding and Communication, are so short that you may be better off combining them. One minor comment is that there is a weird arrow symbol in your Cocoon and Pupa section that you may want to get rid of. Finally, if you are looking to expand your article, it may make sense to discuss the mating systems of your species. This is a wonderful article and you should be proud of all the work you have done! kaykup (talk) 20:22, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wash U Review: Last Round!

This article is looking stellar! Tons of info, and links and it's organized really well. I added a bunch of in text images to try and bump the article up to good status. Otherwise it looks like you followed the previous reviewers suggestions and really fleshed out your article. Atkarp (talk) 00:10, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

This seems like a great article with lots of internal links and some great information on the behavior of this species. I just have two suggestions. The first is that you could make your introductory paragraph slightly longer, and include a comprehensive overview of the information you discuss in your article. This would give the reader a full idea of what your article covers when they read the introduction. In addition, I do not see a Taxonomy and Phylogeny section anywhere in your article. I think that adding this would be helpful to readers and would give them an idea of the genus and any closely related species. Besides those two things, great work! Katieortman (talk) 09:49, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Last Comments

Great job on your article!!!! It is super interesting and I love the pictures and information!!! (I love tarantulas as well so I think your article is fantastic!!) It is organized really well and gives a lot of detail in every section. I changed a couple of tiny things, such as a couple of sentences that seemed a bit long so I split them up into two sentences. I also saw a few words that were plural and should have been singular, so I changed those. In addition, the section titled "Body armor" actually said "Body amor" when I looked at it so I fixed that as well. Lastly, your taxabox contained 3 dead links, so I simply removed the links. Overall, awesome job!!! Three is me (talk) 01:17, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]