Template:Did you know nominations/Dysidea arenaria
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by — Maile (talk) 20:58, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Dysidea arenaria[edit]
- ...
that the marine sponge Dysidea arenaria was originally discovered in Palau?
- Reviewed: 2016 United States federal budget
- Comment: OK, I tried; I couldn't come up with a chemistry hook that anyone but me would click on.
Created by Opabinia regalis (talk). Self-nominated at 03:14, 13 September 2015 (UTC).
Article long enough and new enough. Citations are in place and neutral, with the hook cited to a reliable source. I might suggest changing "discovered in" to "described from" given the article doesn't mention the dates or locations that specimens were collected from (Do we know that the Palau specimens were the first to be collected, even though they were the first to be described?)--Kevmin § 23:16, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Kevmin: The Palau project started in 1955 and the first description was published in 1965 (Bergquist). I don't think it's possible to exclude its unnoticed presence in earlier collections from other locations. It's true that the concept of 'discovering' a species is a little squishy. How about:
- ALT1: ... that the marine sponge Dysidea arenaria was originally described based on a single specimen collected near Palau?
- That's not all that unusual for weird marine fauna, but sounds a little more interesting? Opabinia regalis (talk) 01:52, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
- I know how that is indeed, my articles are all on fossil insect taxa, so it very common for new taxa descriptions to be made on specimens that were collected decades earlier.
Article long enough and new enough. Citations are in place and neutral, with the hook cited to a reliable source. Referecnes are offline/paywalled so I assume good faith on the hook and the lack of policy violations. Alt one hook good to go.--Kevmin § 19:09, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Kevmin: The Palau project started in 1955 and the first description was published in 1965 (Bergquist). I don't think it's possible to exclude its unnoticed presence in earlier collections from other locations. It's true that the concept of 'discovering' a species is a little squishy. How about:
