Template:Did you know nominations/Odontomachus paleomyagra
- 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 Yoninah (talk) 22:49, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Odontomachus paleomyagra[edit]
... that the Czech fossil ant, Odontomachus paleomyagra, has mandibles most similar to South African species?
Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
- Reviewed: Thrips tabaci
Created by Kevmin (talk). Self-nominated at 21:21, 13 March 2017 (UTC).
New enough, long enough, QPQ complete. No close paraphrasing via spot checks, no copyvios picked up by the tool. Neutral. Cites sources, but not particularly well. Could you please adjust the reference style so that each citation cites a specific page within the sources? This would make it much easier to verify things. For instance, you could create a references list and then have a notes section that cites a specific page within the source? See WP:CITESHORT for one possible solution. Basically, it's not terribly helpful to link to a 40 page pdf that can't be easily searched to find the information you've cited. The hook could use a bit of work. First, the article doesn't say mandibles are most similar to South African species; it says they're similar to two specific species, one from south-east Africa and one from south-east Asia. Perhaps your hook could note that the fossils of this species were found in Europe but their mandibles are similar to those of ants from other continents? This would be a more interesting way to frame things, and more in line with what's written in the article now. I still need to verify the cite on the hook, but I'll do so after the citations are cleaned up to avoid having to read a 40 page scientific paper in its entirety. Ping me once you've responded to these issues and I'll review again. ~ Rob13Talk 08:40, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- @BU Rob13: Reference style adjusted (though I am not a fan of it, since it is not a style typicaly used in entomology and paleontology writing). Regarding the hook, I was trying to keep the hook within the 200 character limit, and noting both Africa and the south-east Asian species group (three species there not one) would make it overly verbose I think.--Kevmin § 12:31, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- @Kevmin: You're certainly welcome to use a different style, so long as what you're citing is clear. For instance, parenthetical citations in the style of any major style guide would be appropriate. You could also duplicate the full references but with different page numbers for each cite, although that's a bit redundant. I'm not trying to enforce any particular style on you, just trying to ensure the information is verifiable to the extent possible. As for the hook, we could do something like "that fossils of the Czech fossil ant, Odontomachus paleomyagra, were located in Europe despite having mandibles most similar to species from other continents?" That's a bit wordy, but not overly so. You're welcome to rework or propose a different alt. My biggest concern here is that, as worded, the current hook isn't reflected in the article. There's no claim in the article that the mandibles are more similar to the south-east African species than the south-east Asian species, so the "most similar" is slightly dubious. Based on the current state of the article (assuming verification checks out - still need to look), I would approve an alt with just "similar" if you prefer that route. ~ Rob13Talk 16:21, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
- Alt1... that the Czech fossil ant, Odontomachus paleomyagra, has mandibles notably similar to South African species?
