Template:Did you know nominations/Protoceratopsidovum

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 sst✈^(discuss) 11:58, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Protoceratopsidovum

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

• ... that the fossil egg genus named Protoceratopsidovum (meaning Protoceratops egg) is not actually the eggs of Protoceratops, but instead belongs to a Maniraptoran?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Hygrophoropsis aurantiaca

5x expanded by Ashorocetus (talk). Self-nominated at 17:14, 23 November 2015 (UTC).

• Article length and date conform to rules. Hook is interesting and cited. No copy vio noted. Text is neutral. QPQ done. Good to go.Nvvchar. 14:37, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

• Does reference three fully discuss the etymology of the name Protoceratopsidovum, its hard to tell, since the article doesnt have a distinct sentence or section on its etymology. Also its not actually correct to word it "meaning xxxx", since thats not how an etymology works.--Kevmin § 23:22, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Your right, the sources doesn't actually explicitly mention the etymology. The first source does mention that the name implies that it is the eggs of Protoceratops, though it doesn't explicitly say that the name means "Protoceratops egg". I think this alt would work, or I can look for a source which gives the etymology explicitly. Ashorocetus (talk | contribs) 00:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

• ALT1 ... that the fossil egg genus named Protoceratopsidovum, despite its name, is not actually the eggs of Protoceratops, but instead belongs to a Maniraptoran?

• That is a better option for sure, and the article should be tweaked to reflect the lack of a consulted etymology section. Most likely the only place that would have a section on the name is the 1994 type description.--Kevmin § 01:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

• I found a source mentioning the etymology: [1], "A Cladistic Analysis of Theropod Ootaxa" by Zelenitsky. Ashorocetus (talk | contribs) 02:18, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

• , no more objections to the article or alt1 hook with the additions and adjustments made.--Kevmin § 02:36, 8 December 2015 (UTC)