Talk:Vespula pensylvanica

Incorrectly identified image?

The image in the lower left hand side of the article, Western yellowjacket.jpg, is probably not of a western yellow jacket.

The images of western yellow jackets from this site, http://www.biology.ualberta.ca/bsc/ejournal/bmc_05/94v_pensylvanica.html, look considerably different that the organism in the image in question. The organism does not possess a yellow eye loop at all and this is one of the items that can be used for species identification according to the site linked to above. The site does say that the eyeloop is occasionally absent in males, however this image looks different enough from the western yellow jacket that I suspect it is not even in the Vespuela genus. All the western yellow jackets in images that I found on line had black antennae. The organism in question has light orange antennae.

Based on images from these sites I wondered if the image in question isn't a Cerceris sextoides: http://nathistoc.bio.uci.edu/hymenopt/Cerceris sextoides.htm http://bugguide.net/node/view/294980

Perhaps Polistes dominula is a better possibility: http://www.biology.ualberta.ca/bsc/ejournal/bmc_05/74p_dominula.html --Davefoc (talk) 02:27, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Class Comments and Suggestions for improvement

In the overview, capitalized the W and Y in the species’ common name, and I rearranged the two last sentences to make it easier to read. I also noticed you had an issue with your picture. I think your article would benefit from more pictures dispersed throughout the sections. I searched your species on Wikimedia, and a handful of pictures came up. The one you have in your taxonomy box is one of them, but I think you should add more to make the article even more legitimate. I have added one next to “foraging,” and another next to “stings,” since I found this particular picture appropriate for the section. Feel free to change or move these pictures around, and definitely add in the last couple picture from Wikimedia. Under your Brood/Parental Care section, I think it’d be interesting to expand on the larvae rivalry when seeking food from workers and queens. Since it is relatively separate from the first part of the section, perhaps you can add more about the specific competition within the brood. I would also be interested in reading more about the “pre-defecation head dance,” since there is no information on what it looks like. The second part of this section (“nest sanitation”) could perhaps be added to the previous section about larvae competition and brood survival. Otherwise, great job! I am very impressed by how much information you gathered and synthesized into this comprehensive article. Chiararosenbaum (talk) 20:09, 1 October 2014 (UTC) Chiara Rosenbaum

Peer Review

Overall, this article is very thorough and descriptive. There is a lot of information on various different aspects of the wasp and there are many heading. I thought the information about the thermo-regulation that the species does along with the fanning of the nest was very interesting. This article had a few grammatical errors and some coding mistakes in the citation that I fixed. Also, a few more words should be hyperlinked. This article is well written and would benefit greatly from the addition of pictures. Amgoldberg15 (talk) 20:40, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

Peer Review

I found this article be incredibly in-depth and I was impressed by the general clarity and organization. There were a couple issues with regards to

Spencer Tong (talk) 09:16, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Review

This article is extremely thorough and presents a lot of interesting information about Vespula pensylvanica. I noticed a couple of minor errors with the location of citations that I attempted to fix (the citation was occurring too far after the sentence or section to which it was referring). There were also some small grammatical and spacing errors throughout the article that I edited out. The information in the article is fairly easy to comprehend, however I would still recommend adding more hyperlinks to some of the terms used within the page. tgalosher

Review

This article is thorough and well organized. There were a few instances of awkward phrasing and tense changes mid paragraph (such as the section on mating behavior), including run-on sentences (in the section on Reproductive Plasticity). I condensed these, and tried to improve word usage as well. Due to the scientific vocabulary used throughout, I think it might be helpful to add more links to the entry. Similarly, I the nest associates section may deserve further subdivision since it seems expansive. VGurusamy — Preceding undated comment added 04:08, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Review

The strengths of this entry are very clear: it touches base with various concepts from Dawkins’ book “The Selfish Gene” and goes into detail about behavioral elements such as dominance hierarchy and kin recognition. Additionally, this article has the makings of a “good” article by being well written, broad in coverage, and neutral. What I learned that was most interesting was that these species often practice mauling (one individual chewing another). This occurs between two workers with one being more aggressive than the other and display this behavior to exhibit dominance over other males. Additionally, this article has a lot of information regarding the behavior of the species including the dominance hierarchy and mating behaviors. Older workers are the most successful and exhibit mauling behavior to show dominance over others. Mating occurs between male and female, with queens mating usually more than once. Overall, this article provides a thorough demonstration of Vespula Pensylvania species of wasps with a rating of B-Class and high-importance.Junsang.cho (talk) 03:18, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Why that name?

Why the name pensylvanica? I note that nn is not in the name, so it has nothing to do with the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania or with Admiral Sir William Penn, but still, I am curious.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 02:51, 9 February 2018 (UTC)