Template:Did you know nominations/Haematomma ochroleucum

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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: rejected by SL93 (talk) 23:16, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Lifted from another editor's sandbox without permission.

DYK toolbox

Haematomma ochroleucum

(
)

Created by 180.54.70.114. Nominated by Leomk0403 (talk) at 03:01, 30 November 2021 (UTC).

  • Not a review, but isn't this fairly common for moss in general? Juxlos (talk) 14:55, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Going to jump in here and let you know that H. ochroleucum is in fact a lichen! You learn something new every day! Ornithoptera (talk) 12:29, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Sources not supplied. Hook is bland.Georgejdorner (talk) 05:27, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Firstly, the hook is indeed cited inline in the article (particularly those that are north-facing., cited to Armstrong), so saying that "sources not supplied" is not the case here. I would agree that the current hook isn't that great if it's the case that most moss grow on north-facing rocks, but a bad hook isn't a reason to fail a nomination unless there really isn't anything else usable as hook facts. @Georgejdorner: Moving forward, I would highly suggest that you avoid quick-failing DYK nominations if any issues are still surmountable, especially if reviews are as incomplete as this: if you want to fail a nomination immediately, I would suggest at least checking first all criteria, rather than just saying that "it lacks sources" and that the hook is "bland". Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:36, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
With that said, looking at the article right now, I'm drawing a blank as to possible hook angles apart from maybe the "blood eye" nomenclature (although that refers to the genus as a whole rather than just this species); perhaps Cwmhiraeth could help out here? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:39, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
@Narutolovehinata5: It's a nice, well-written article. What about
  • ALT1 ... that in Europe, Haematomma ochroleucum commonly grows on rocks facing north, while in North America it occurs primarily in waterfall spray zones? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:57, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, that is a much better hook. I'd just like to hear Leomk0403's thoughts on it first before proceeding. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 02:01, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
Taking a look at the article and it meets all the requirements for a new creation. A QPQ has been done. ALT1 is cited inline. I'm assuming good faith for the "north-facing rocks" part since I can't access the journal article in question. As for the waterfall part, I've read the article and it seems that it doesn't explicitly say that the species "primarily" occurs in waterfall spray zones: indeed the journal article isn't specifically about this species but lichens in general, and while it does mention that the species can be found in spray zones, I can't seem to see where in the source does "primarily" come from. Can this point be clarified? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 00:52, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

ALT2 : ... that on Bornholm Island Haematomma ochroleucum grows onto rocks 10 m (33 ft) high, along with sea ivory? source: https://jstor.org/stable/3682615 Leomk0403 (Don't shout here, Shout here!) 02:13, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Apologies for the late reply, but ALT2 doesn't really sound that amazing (especially since the hook doesn't even make it clear that the species is a lichen). Maybe some variant of ALT1 but rephrased would work better here. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:27, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
While I think ALT4 is the best hook among those proposed so far, the issue is that the "bloody eye" reference is actually for the genus as a whole and not this specific species. I would be willing to approve some form of ALT4 as long as it's clarified that the reference is to the genus name and not the species, however. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 13:20, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. Just waiting for a response from Leomk0403 before approving ALT6. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 03:34, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Yeah.Leomk0403 (Don't shout here, Shout here!) 10:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. I'm accepting the source in good faith. Just one last thing: it seems that the apothecium thing actually refers to the genus as a whole as opposed to this species specifically (hence the "bloody eye" name), and so ALT6 may need further revisions. I will approve the nomination once that is resolved. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 05:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
  • ALT7 : ... that the yellow bloodstain lichen belongs to a genus which is called "bloody eye" in Latin, due to the red colour of the cup-shaped fruit body? Storye book (talk) 09:51, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
  • ALT8 : ... that the yellow bloodstain lichen belongs to a genus which is called "bloody eye" in Latin, due to the red colour of the cup-shaped fruit body in that group? Storye book (talk) 09:51, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
  • Thank you. I am approving ALT8 as the most accurate wording to the article text. I'm just not sure if common names for species should be italicized or not (since scientific names are italicized), but it's not a DYK concern and if a change needs to be done it can always be done during the promotion process. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
    • Thank you for the review. I have un-italicised the common plant name. Storye book (talk) 10:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
      • @Narutolovehinata5 and Storye book: If we have to put that many hedges and disclaimers in the hook for accuracy, it might be worth turning to something we can make punchier, just to preserve hookiness. How about: theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 08:51, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
        • ALT9: ... that the yellow bloodstain lichen turns purple when exposed to potassium?
          • You'll have a hedges and disclaimer problem with ALT9 as well, unfortunately, because it's only the apothecia (fruit bodies) which turn purple on contact with potassium. That's possibly only a small part of the lichen/fungus; also, fruit bodies only appear seasonally. If I understand correctly, the top picture in the article has the flora (where fruit bodies will be) which look like red spots. The bottom picture has no flora or fruit bodies. So if that is the case, then the whole plant does not turn purple on contact with potassium. Leomk0403 can you confirm this? Storye book (talk) 10:50, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
          • ALT10 : ... that the yellow bloodstain lichen belongs to a genus which is called "bloody eye" in Latin? Storye book (talk) 11:38, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
ALT11 is frankly rather meh for reasons I mentioned earlier. If ALT10 is unsuitable, then why not go with a variation that uses the scientific name instead? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 10:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Thank you. I'm ready to approve ALT12 only, I'm just waiting for the nominator to sign it off. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 01:29, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
Actually I'll just go ahead and approve this so that the nomination won't be stuck any longer. Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 09:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
  • - @SL93, Narutolovehinata5, Theleekycauldron, Storye book, and Leomk0403: per discussion at WT:DYK#Queue 6: Haematomma ochroleucum I'm reopening this for further discussion. The hook fact doesn't appear to be accurate, as the term is not Latin but Greek, and from that discussion it seem that it is a direct derivative of hematoma, which is a Greek term for which our article says "The word derives from the Greek αἷμα haima "blood" and -ωμα -oma, a suffix forming nouns indicating a mass or tumo". We need to either amend to make the hook accurate, or come up with a new hook. Cheers  — Amakuru (talk) 19:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • WP is not being medically clear, according to your quotation. In medical terms, a haematoma is a swelling full of blood which has amassed under the skin but outside of veins, arteries etc. A common name for a haematoma which forms over your eye (if, for example, you have got into a fist fight) is a black eye. Another common name for the same thing (also meaning a haematoma of the eye) is a bloody eye. You can amend the hook to say Greek and not Latin, that would be correct. But it remains true that a haematoma is - in vernacular terms - a bloody eye. If you look it up on medical sites, it will define a haematoma as a swelling full of blood which has collected outside a vein or artery. You have used the words "mass or tumo" but that does not mean a tumor. Your source is using those words in the sense of tumescent, that means swollen up - as in a black eye, swelled up with blood. Storye book (talk) 21:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • This article was moved from my sandbox to live space without my knowledge or permission. The user who copied it (and didn't attribute me) has done this before with other articles I'm developing. I ask that this nomination be closed and the article removed from live space unless my work is attributed! The original sandbox article is here, if you need to check. MeegsC (talk) 21:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • MeegsC I have checked, you are correct. I am very sad that that has happened. I do hope that your work can be attributed to you asap, and that you can be credited for this DYK, if you choose to pursue it. I am happy to cooperate with and/or support whatever you decide to do about it. All the best. ETA I understand that an administrator can manually move and merge your history into the existing history of this article. I suggest that you ask an admin to do that? Storye book (talk) 22:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Haematomma_ochroleucum&oldid=1066677518"