Template:Did you know nominations/Ypresiosirex

Add links
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) 05:25, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Ypresiosirex[edit]

(
)

Created by Kevmin (talk). Self-nominated at 19:27, 5 September 2016 (UTC). Article is:

  • New enough, created on September 5, 2016.
  • Long enough, 2910 characters
  • Neutral.

Hook format and content is:

  • OK, assuming named source is accurate.

Other:

  • QPQ

Comments: Please assign categories to the article. Suggest breaking up the long paragraphs into more readable, shorter paragraphs.

  • @Btphelps: Categories have been added. The paragraphs are in line with other articles on extinct taxa.--Kevmin § 00:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
  • This review is incredibly confusing, with ticks being given out wholesale, and no reviewer signature. Reviewer: please only give one summary icon at the bottom of the review indicating its overall DYK status, and be sure to review all criteria; for example, you have not mentioned having done a check for close paraphrasing/copyvio, nor is there any mention of overall article sourcing. Is there any reason to suspect that the hook sourcing might not be reliable? Finally, since there are two hooks, you need to review them both, and be sure to mention which are approved. (Among other criteria, hooks also need to be interesting.) Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 19:10, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
  • It's been sometime since I reviewed a DYK nom. I'm sorry my review was not more detailed and that I forgot to add a sig.
  • Copyvio checked. No problems found.
  • The first hook is now supported by the article. [Updated 9/29]
  • The second hook is a little short and lacks some zing. I suggest the following:
...that the extinct sawfly Ypresiosirex orthosemos was described from a single fossil found in the McAbee Fossil Beds near Cache Creek, British Columbia?
  • The source for the second hook is a scientific article that is not accessible without a subscription, but which has been cited by numerous other articles, lending credibility to its veracity.
— btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 00:10, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
@Btphelps: The first hook is supported by the article, specifically the etymology section of the type description.--Kevmin § 03:51, 26 September 2016 (UTC)
@Btphelps:, did you see my note regarding the first hook, and is the article passed or needing more work?--Kevmin § 15:15, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Kevnin, while the article mentions the wing corrugation, it does not clearly state that the "corrugation" on the wings are the source of it's name. If you can clear that issue up, please do. Meanwhile, I've completed my review. Others have weighed in and I hope I've resolved those issues. I don't see anything else holding up the nom. — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 18:47, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
@Btphelps: Please take a look at the species etymology section, which notes "Etymology. The specific epithet orthosemos means “with vertical stripes” in Greek, referring to the distinctive transverse corrugation in the forewing basal cells."--Kevmin § 19:49, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
@Kevmin:, we must be looking at two different versions. The current version is written, "The specific epithet orthosemos is derived from Greek meaning "with vertical stipes", alluding to the texture of the wing membrane at its base". It doesn't use the word "corrugated" which is what the layperson (me) is looking to validate. — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 21:22, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
@Btphelps: I am looking at the article and the type description. I reworded the etymology to avoid WP:coypyvio, using "distinct texture" rather then "corrugation". However if you are going to be stringent on the wording, I have inserted "corrugated" into the sentence. Does that satisfy?--Kevmin § 01:23, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

@Btphelps: We are still waiting on if you give the nomination a pass.--Kevmin § 17:16, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Pass. — btphelps (talk to me) (what I've done) 17:44, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Ypresiosirex&oldid=960451440"