Talk:Aquilegia barykinae

Plants Low‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	It is requested that a range map be included in this article to improve its quality.

Did you know nomination

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the columbine Aquilegia barykinae is likely less closely related the similar-looking Aquilegia amurensis that shares its range than to other columbine species?

Source: [1]

Reviewed: 1.) Template:Did you know nominations/KCTV, 2.) Template:Did you know nominations/Self-Portrait (Ellen Thesleff), 3.) Template:Did you know nominations/Tema "Sacher", 4.) Template:Did you know nominations/Ken Battle
Comment:

Created by Jacketpocket (talk) and Pbritti (talk) Number of QPQs required: 4. DYK is currently in unreviewed backlog mode and nominator has 55 past nominations.

Pbritti (talk) 22:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Starting review--Kev min § 19:29, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles are new enough and long enough. Each is fully cited and neutral in composition. Checking of available references shows no copyvio or close paraphrasing issues. The hook is rather clunky as presented, can you trim it to flow a bit better?--Kevmin § 18:25, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Kevmin: Will trim shortly. Thanks for the review. Nearly missed your comment; please remember to use the {{subst:DYKproblem}} template when you identify a problem! ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Below is ALT1:
    - "... that Aquilegia barykinae is likely more closely related to other columbine species than to Aquilegia amurensis, which shares its range?"

Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 23:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Articles are new enough and long enough, both are well cited as is to be expected for a recent description and an older taxon. Articles are neutral in writing and don't have any visible policy issues. "Alt1" preferred as the more concise nomination. Looks good to go.--Kev min § 17:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]