Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Bramble Cay Melomys

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: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:26, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Bramble Cay Melomys

[edit]

Improved to Good Article status by The lorax (talk), Vanamonde, and User:Laterthanyouthink. Self-nominated at 21:17, 23 May 2019 (UTC).

  • I said this at the talk page, where you chose to ignore me; I'll say it again here. Nominating an article for GAN or DYK without pinging the other major contributors to the page or adding them as conominators is thoroughly discourteous. This is especially true when you did not do anything to actually fix issues raised during a GA review; I was the one to get it through the GA process. Please make the relevant fixes now. Vanamonde (Talk) 21:52, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
  • My apologies, @Vanamonde93:, I am additionally pinging @Laterthanyouthink: who contributed significantly to the article. I wanted to nominate this to bring attention to the hard work you all did to bring this to Good article status.The lorax (talk) 23:48, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the nominations, The lorax, and thanks for getting it up to scratch, Vanamonde93. (I'm not familiar with with these processes, so just an interested observer at this point.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:59, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

this nomination still needs a DYK policy review. Flibirigit (talk) 14:01, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Article was recently promoted to GA status, no close paraphrasing was found (Earwig's hit appears to be a false positive), nominator has only three DYK credits so QPQ is not yet required. Both hooks are approved as interesting and cited inline. @The lorax, Vanamonde93, and Laterthanyouthink: This will be good to go once clarification is given on whether or not the credits issue has been resolved. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:12, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Narutolovehinata5: Yes, the credits issue has been resolved; two editors have been added to the credits; I don't have any concerns that preclude promoting this. Vanamonde (Talk) 19:16, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:33, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
@The lorax, Vanamonde93, and Laterthanyouthink: I cannot bring myself to promote this hook because it is incorrect. You need to use "probably", "likely", "may be" or some such qualifier in the hook because you can't say any particular storm is due to man-made climate change, nor can the person who made this statement know whether any other mammal has become extinct due to anthropogenic climate change, they can only speculate that this may be the first such extinction. The New York Times stated "Significantly, this probably represents the first recorded mammalian extinction due to anthropogenic climate change" and we should stick to this line. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 08:38, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
@Cwmhiraeth: Yes, fair point. I hadn't actually reviewed the hooks before this; as you may have seen, I've been offline a lot; but here is an alternative below, that should be acceptable. Vanamonde (Talk) 14:58, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Thank you. ALT2 is acceptable, so I am replacing the tick. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:02, 30 June 2019 (UTC)