Template:Did you know nominations/Maatidesmus
- 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) 06:36, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Maatidesmus
[edit]
Maatidesmus paachtun 3D micro-CT reconstruction
- ... that the fossil millipede Maatidesmus paachtun (pictured) is named from the Mayan words for "amber", "back", and "stone"?
- Reviewed: Hygrophoropsis rufa
Created by Kevmin (talk). Self-nominated at 16:30, 25 November 2015 (UTC).
This article definitely passes for date of creation (25 November) and length (at 2830 or so, much more than the required 1500 characters of prose). It is well-cited, and uses sources that are definitely credible. Moreover, there is very little indication of plagiarism. However, before I would give it the go ahead for DYK I have two quibbles. 1. The hook fact derives from multiple statements in the article about the etymology of the species name, but only one of those statements is supported with an inline citation. I would apply an inline citation to the sentence: "The genus name is a derived from a combination of the Mayan word maat for "amber" and "idesmus", wich [sic] is used frequently as a genus suffix in the family Chelodesmidae." (I went and fixed the typo in that sentence after I copy/pasted it!) 2. The link in the hook shouldn't lead to a redirect. Just have it read [[Maatidesmus|Maatidesmus paachtun]]. 3. Finally, if I could suggest a bit more grammatically coherent hook: 'that the fossil millipede Maatidesmus paachtun (pictured) takes its name from the Mayan words for "amber," "back," and "stone"?' — AJDS talk 22:24, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Now, regarding the image. It's free use (you can find that explicitly stated at the source here [1]); is certainly used in the article; but does it show up well at 100×100px? I don't know. Above it's shown at 120×133. It has lettering that doesn't have a key to explain it. I'm not sure. Leaning towards "no" for the front page. — AJDS talk 22:24, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Alekjds: With regard to point 1, the two sentences are both concurrent to each other, and use the same source, so it would feel and look like overcitation to cite both. point 2 There have not been problems with redirect links in my nominations prior, and if I recall correctly within the last two weeks it was stated on the DYK talk page that use of a redirect was fine, I will adjust it rather then be a bull about it though. Point three 3 the wording takes its name from doesnt seem to have the same connotations as is named from, takes its name from is usually used in context of vernacular names, while is named from seems to convey the more rigid nature of a binomial. Point 4, the main page images are now 200x200 if I recall correctly, unless that has been changed very recently? The lettering is explained in the file information section, so it is present.--Kevmin § 00:01, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Kevmin:
Thanks for your replies. I'm happy to accept your reasoning on point 1. It was certainly easy enough for me to find the reference for the other two names even though they aren't explicitly cited. My philosophy in the matter was 'better safe than sorry.' About point 2, thanks; I'm a little allergic to redirects for whatever reason; seems better to be precise. Point 3: I'm happy to go with "named from"... for me I think the most useful changes are the quotations around the words it's named for, which just make it easier to read. Can we go with: 'that the fossil millipede Maatidesmus paachtun (pictured) is named from the Mayan words for "amber," "back," and "stone"?' Now, as for the images, I wasn't aware of that change and I was going off of the guidelines as they're still presented in the header that I'm looking at right now as I'm typing this message. If you know better, than very well, good thing. Given all the above I am going to go ahead and give this the green check box. — AJDS talk 01:02, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Kevmin:
