Talk:Eoseira

Algae Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Algae, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the photosynthetic organisms commonly called algae and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AlgaeWikipedia:WikiProject AlgaeTemplate:WikiProject AlgaeAlgae articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	It is requested that a picture or pictures be included in this article to improve its quality.

Marine life (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marine life, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Marine lifeWikipedia:WikiProject Marine lifeTemplate:WikiProject Marine lifeMarine life articles

Palaeontology Low‑importance

	Paleontology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Palaeontology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of palaeontology-related topics and create a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource 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.PalaeontologyWikipedia:WikiProject PalaeontologyTemplate:WikiProject PalaeontologyPalaeontology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Canada: British Columbia / The 10,000 Challenge Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.
	This article was created or improved during The 10,000 Challenge of WikiProject Canada, which started in November 2016 and is ongoing. You can help!!
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

A fact from Eoseira appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 3 May 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Eoseira wilsonii "slime" likely helped in fossil preservation?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2022/May. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eoseira.

Wikipedia

Did you know nomination

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 Z1720 (talk) 21:09, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that Eoseira wilsonii "slime" likely helped in fossil preservation? Source: Wolfe & Edlund 2005 page 255-256 final paragraph of "Paleoecological considerations" secton
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Styx (butterfly)

Created by Kevmin (talk). Self-nominated at 22:24, 11 April 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Kevmin: Earwig detects no copyvio issues, new enough and long enough. QPQ is done and its an interesting hook. Checked the source paper and everything checks out. Great work as always! Ornithoptera (talk) 00:22, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to promote this, but I'm worried that the wikilink in the hook is misleading, causing readers to think they are clicking on Eoseira wilsonii instead of Eoseira. I'm suggesting some ALTs below:

ALT0a: ...that Eoseira wilsonii, a member of the genus Eoseira, produced a slime that likely helped in fossil preservation?
ALT0b: ... that a slime produced by Eoseira wilsonii, a member of the genus Eoseira, likely helped in fossil preservation?

@Kevmin and Ornithoptera: Thoughts? Z1720 (talk) 20:21, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: I don't see an issue with the current structure. There is only a single species in the genus, the article covers that in the very first sentence. I think both proposed alts are suffering from over verbosity along the addition of wikiliks that lead to the same article the bolded link does. Why do you feel the article is not clear that its about the genus and species both, (as all the known information covers both without separation?--Kev min § 20:32, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kevmin: Answering your question, in ALT0 the hook says Eoseira wilsonii, while the wikilink is to Eoseira. Since there's an article to Eoseira wilsonii, readers might think they are clicking on the species article but instead going to the Eoseira. To use an analogy, this would be like a hook saying "Canada" but linking to "North America": readers would think they are clicking on a link to the country, but are instead going to the article about the continent. I feel like this creates an MOS:EGG situation, where the piped link is not intuitive. Z1720 (talk) 20:41, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The readers ARE being taked to the article on Eoseira wilsonii though, they are not bein taken to an article on something else. This is not an mos:egg situation as the article that eraders come to is the article on the subject. The very first sentance in the opening of Eoseira is Eoseira is an extinct genus of diatoms belonging to the family Aulacoseiraceae and containing the single species Eoseria wilsonii.--Kev min § 20:53, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is my mistake: I did not notice that Eoseira wilsonii leads to Eoseira. I am going to reevaluate this now to see if it can be promoted. Z1720 (talk) 21:05, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted ALT0 to Prep 3. Z1720 (talk) 21:09, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Illustration?

I'm not expert in the topic, but why is there an illustration of a different species, with what sure looks like a misspelled caption? IAmNitpicking (talk) 13:01, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@IAmNitpicking:, the spelling error has been corrected. The illustration is used in conjunction with the paleoecology paragraph which notes Aulacoseira species diatoms also present in the Horsefly shales, and with the classification paragraph discussing the relationship between Aulacoseira and Eoseira--Kev min § 15:22, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]