Template:Did you know nominations/Roupala montana
- The following discussion 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 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:09, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Roupala montana, Richeria grandis, Parinari campestris[edit]
( Back to T:TDYK )
( Article history links: )
- ... that Roupala montana, Richeria grandis (pictured) and Parinari campestris, all known by the common name bois bandé, are reputed to have aphrodisiac properties?
- Reviewed: Shell growth in estuaries
Created/expanded by Guettarda (talk). Self nom at 15:59, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
- Reviewing now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
I assume good faith on the offline reference. This hook checks out otherwise. Richeria grandis is an expansion begun January 10, while the others are new enough January articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:47, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
This is a triple hook, which under DYK rules revised a few months ago requires three QPQ reviews. (It is no longer acceptable to do hook-for-hook reviews; article-for-article reviews are required.) Unfortunately, that means that another two reviews are required before this nomination can properly be approved. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:42, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
- I wasn't aware of that requirement. I've added Hierarchical generalized linear model and Cornulaca monacantha Guettarda (talk) 18:49, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
As I said, it's a fairly recent change. Thanks for doing the two additional reviews. Restoring approval per TonyTheTiger, but using the gray AGF tick, since the key hook fact is dependent on an offline source. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:21, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
