Template:Did you know nominations/Leptodactylus pustulatus
- 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 Montanabw(talk) 02:16, 30 July 2016 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Leptodactylus pustulatus
[edit]... that the female frog Leptodactylus pustulatus seems to provide some parental care?
- Reviewed: La Dori
5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 08:31, 7 July 2016 (UTC).
No issues found with article, ready for human review.
- ✓ This article has been expanded from 254 chars to 2398 chars since 17:09, 04 May 2016 (UTC), a 9.44-fold expansion
- ✓ This article meets the DYK criteria at 2398 characters
- ✓ All paragraphs in this article have at least one citation
- ✓ This article has no outstanding maintenance tags
- ✓ The probability of copyright violation is 11.5%. (confirm)
- Note to reviewers: There is low confidence in this automated metric, please manually verify that there is no copyright infringement or close paraphrasing. Note that this number may be inflated due to cited quotes and titles which do not constitute a copyright violation.
- No overall issues detected
- ✓ The hook ALT0 is an appropriate length at 78 characters
- ✓ Cwmhiraeth has more than 5 DYK credits. A QPQ review of Template:Did you know nominations/La Dori was performed for this nomination.
Automatically reviewed by DYKReviewBot. This bot is experimental; please report any issues. This is not a substitute for a human review. --DYKReviewBot (report bugs) 22:45, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
. Grudgingly, because this is possibly the most boring DYK hook I've ever seen, but looking at the article there's nothing more obvious that jumps out at me. The paper referenced for the hook is behind a paywall, but the cited fact is included in the abstract so no issues there. The "copyvio" spotted by the bot is The International Union for Conservation of Nature has assessed its conservation status as being of "least concern"
, a phrase which can't easily be reworded so I wouldn't consider as problematic. GTG. ‑ Iridescent 16:59, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
- FYI, parental care is exceedingly rare among amphibians, so this is really exciting! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:40, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Sure, but the casual readers on the main page neither know nor care; from the viewpoint of someone with a decent knowledge of animal behaviour but who knows nothing about frogs (a group I imagine roughly correlates with "the entire population of the world minus a few thousand people") "parents have been observed looking after their children" is roughly equivalent to "bears have been observed shitting in the woods". (Add to that that the one piece of frog parental behaviour casual readers are likely to know is the sequence from every single "wonders of nature" show ever made, of the mother frog incubating the tadpoles in her mouth, so I imagine that those who have thought about such things assume that amphibians are if anything more nurturing than other animals.) Note that I'm not opposing this—I can't see any obvious alternative—I just think it will prompt a "who cares?" reaction. ‑ Iridescent 15:29, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Unlike Iridescent, I am opposing this: it is simply not an interesting hook, and thus does not qualify for DYK. Even the wording, with its "seems to", adds to the problem. If this is "really exciting", then there should be a way to convey this excitement to the reader. I've struck the original hook. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:25, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
- Sure, but the casual readers on the main page neither know nor care; from the viewpoint of someone with a decent knowledge of animal behaviour but who knows nothing about frogs (a group I imagine roughly correlates with "the entire population of the world minus a few thousand people") "parents have been observed looking after their children" is roughly equivalent to "bears have been observed shitting in the woods". (Add to that that the one piece of frog parental behaviour casual readers are likely to know is the sequence from every single "wonders of nature" show ever made, of the mother frog incubating the tadpoles in her mouth, so I imagine that those who have thought about such things assume that amphibians are if anything more nurturing than other animals.) Note that I'm not opposing this—I can't see any obvious alternative—I just think it will prompt a "who cares?" reaction. ‑ Iridescent 15:29, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- FYI, parental care is exceedingly rare among amphibians, so this is really exciting! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:40, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- ALT1 ... that the male Brazilian Leptodactylus pustulatus frog makes 26 calls per minute?
- ALT2
... that the male Brazilian Leptodactylus pustulatus frogs advertise themselves by making about 26 calls per minute?
