Template:Did you know nominations/Borocera cajani
- 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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 04:11, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Borocera cajani
- ... that Borocera cajani produces a form of wild silk that has been harvested for hundreds of years? Endemic silk moths (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae) in Madagascar have been collected and exploited for centuries by local populations either for food or as a source of silk cocoons from which textiles are made.
- ALT1: ... that the silk from Borocera cajani moths are dyed using mud or charcoal? Women in central Madagascar collect, spin, and weave the silk to create different pieces, such as scarves and shawls. The pieces range in earth-tone colors, which are created using natural plant dyes, or natural materials like mud or charcoal.
- ALT2: ... that the people of Madagascar regularly exhume the bodies of the deceased to re-wrap their bodies with shrouds made of Borocera cajani silk? To be wrapped by many “Lambamena” (red silk shrouds) is a sign of supreme honor according to the Madagascan adage: “Izay sahy maty mifono lambamena” (literally translated as “the intrepid facing the death wears one “Landibe” shroud”) (Rakotoniaina, 2009). The “Landibe” shroud is preferred over that made with Bombyx mori for Madagascan ritual burials and for exhumations or “Famadihana” (a Madagascan habit to renew the shroud of mortal remains every 5 to 10 years)
- Comment: Elevated to Good Article status on 12 November 2021. This is my second DYK nomination so I do not believe QPQ applies right away, but if it is necessary (I am not the most familiar with the process yet but I was told this was okay) I will be eager to do so. Please let me know if this is the case. ALT2 is preferred because of the interesting hook, but I am concerned about its lengthiness.
Improved to Good Article status by Chiswick Chap (talk). Nominated by Ornithoptera (talk) at 01:15, 14 November 2021 (UTC).
General eligibility:
- New enough:
- Long enough:
- Other problems:
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- Neutral:
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
- Other problems:
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: None required. |
Overall: 
Article has been promoted to Good Article and meets minimum readable prose requirements. From my review it meets policy requirements. Hook is fine, properly formatted and sourced, should be interesting to a broad audience, and meets other requirements. Good that it doesn't note it's a moth, IMO, to draw people into the article. Alt2 would likely work as well. QPQ not required. No image considered. Nomination is good from this reviewer's point of view. Airborne84 (talk) 02:42, 20 November 2021 (UTC)