Template:Did you know nominations/Aphaenogaster mayri

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 Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:02, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Aphaenogaster mayri

(

)

~~... that over 200 fossils were known of Aphaenogaster mayri (pictured) when the species was described in 1930?~~

Reviewed: Changyuraptor

Created by Kevmin (talk). Self nominated at 04:57, 22 July 2014 (UTC).

Not a review, but none of the sources mention the species, except perhaps this one (Carpenter, F. M. (1930). "The fossil ants of North America" (PDF). Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology. 70: 1–66.), which I can't access for some reason. You might want to check and see if the URL is correct. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 16:08, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I've updated the pdf link for Fossil ants of North America and you should have not problem accessing it now. The other references are specifically addressing the changes in age assignment for the Florissant formation.--Kev min § 16:37, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind a few more suggestions. It might help if you reorganized the References to have both a "notes" section and a bibliography, where you could put the entire The fossil ants of North America citation, and then reference specific pages in the notes section, such as "Carpenter, 1930, pg. 24" for the "200 fossils" claim, or "Carpenter, 1930, pg. 30" for the description. It would make it easier for the reader to find the specific source for each claim. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 19:50, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

I will confess I have never been a fan of the notes + Bibliography style, as its not one that is found in paleontology research papers at all. The Aphaenogaster mayri information is found on pages 30 and 31 of Carpenter, with the 200 specimens statement being found at the end of the notes section on page 31 of the description.--Kev min § 13:05, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

ALT1 ... that over 200 fossils of Aphaenogaster mayri (pictured) were known when the species was described in 1930? EEng (talk) 03:48, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Alt 1 is good, any more comments from G S Palmer about the nomination?--Kev min § 18:47, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Still no word from G S Palmer on this, will someone else take over?--Kev min § 02:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Full review needed, since one has not yet been done. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:37, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

This article is new enough and long enough. The hook has an inline citation, the image is appropriately licensed, QPQ has been done, and I detected no policy issues. Going with ALT1 as being better expressed. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:19, 25 August 2014 (UTC)