Template:Did you know nominations/Spicara maena
- 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 Allen3 talk 10:25, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Spicara maena, Spicara smaris
[edit]( Back to T:TDYK )
( Article history links: )
... that both the picarel and the blotched picarel change sex as they grow?
- Reviewed: DJ Hoppa, Sirah (rapper)
Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nominated at 07:23, 25 March 2014 (UTC).
- I can't get past the interesting fact that the "Atlantic range extends from Morocco northwards to the Canary Islands." The Canaries are not north of Morocco, are they? (Not even on Wikipedia.) Also, the pictures contradict the descriptions. --(AfadsBad (talk) 04:43, 29 March 2014 (UTC))
- I have relocated the Canaries! As for the (single) picture, the fish is probably variable in appearance across its wide range - it has 21 synonyms after all - hence the apparent discrepancy between the image and the description. I thought it best to remove the image from this nomination. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:35, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Can you point us to the source(s) that state that the sex change happens when reaching a certain size, and not e.g. when reaching a certain age? The oldest are all male, the largest are all male, but I couldn't detect a statement in the sources that attributed the sex change to size. Correlation is not causation and so on. Fram (talk) 13:55, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
- The FishBase source says that the blotched picarel is a protogynous hermaphrodite, which means it starts life as a female and becomes a male later. The Soykan paper states, in the discussion section near the end, that the sex inversion happens between the lengths of 14.5 cm and 18 cm. The FishBase page for the picarel just says "protogyny". The hook says "as they grow" which seems reasonable to me. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:50, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
- Um, no, that's original research. The "sex inversion" simply indicates the statistical length at which more are male than female, it doesn't indicate at what length the sex change actually happens. It can be age based, length based, weight based, or something else, but "as they grow" gives the impression that it is caused by length. Perhaps the sex change causes a growth spurt instead? The spicara smaris article states "becoming males when they reach a certain size", which clearly indicates that you believe the change is caused by reaching a certain length. Please don't make such statements without good, clear, unambiguous sources, and don't make hooks about such things either. Fram (talk) 15:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
- I don't think "as they grow" bears the implications you give it, but anyway, how about: Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:15, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
- Um, no, that's original research. The "sex inversion" simply indicates the statistical length at which more are male than female, it doesn't indicate at what length the sex change actually happens. It can be age based, length based, weight based, or something else, but "as they grow" gives the impression that it is caused by length. Perhaps the sex change causes a growth spurt instead? The spicara smaris article states "becoming males when they reach a certain size", which clearly indicates that you believe the change is caused by reaching a certain length. Please don't make such statements without good, clear, unambiguous sources, and don't make hooks about such things either. Fram (talk) 15:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
- ALT1 ... that both the picarel and the blotched picarel start life as females but later change sex?
- And are you going to do anything about the articles? Either find sources which support your claims, or remove your original research? Fram (talk) 08:17, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- I have changed the relevant sentences in the articles. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:47, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- And are you going to do anything about the articles? Either find sources which support your claims, or remove your original research? Fram (talk) 08:17, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Full review needed. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:17, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Age, size and hook cited for Spicara maena - a couple of sentences aligned with sources more closely. [citation needed] tag left. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:24, 21 April 2014 (UTC)- Age and size check out for Spicara smaris. Need to rejig length to align with sources: this has 5-15 cm length range to max of 20 cm, while this has males at 20 and females at 15 cm. Also I note this mentions protrusible jaw which I didn't see in hte refs for maena, yet maena has the sentence and smaris doesn't - was the sentence accidentally placed in maena instead of smaris? The source used for depth says generally 15-70 m with 328 m in Ionian Sea - I think it'd be good to align with the source more closely as it sounds like the one locale is the deep place, not generally. Finally, I like ALT1 as a safer hook aligned with material cited. To sum up, just a couple of tweaks. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
- @Casliber: I think you may have got a bit confused reviewing these two articles. The citation needed tag is inappropriate in the Spicara maena article because the reference #3 appears two sentences later and covers all of the previous information. Nevertheless I have added an extra citation for your benefit.
- In Spicara smaris there is a single source for the whole description and it has the dimensions that I give in the article and mentions the protrusible jaw. Because the dimensions don't precisely agree in the several different sources used elsewhere in the article, I thought it best to do the whole description section from a single source. I have dealt with the depth range matter. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
- I can't see any mention of protrusible jaw in the reference used, which is weird as the one for S. smaris does. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
- There was a citation missing which I have now added. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:13, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
- In Spicara smaris, I think a "maximum" is needed to make then "Spicara smaris grows to a maximum length of 20 cm (8 in) but a more common maximum size is 15 cm (6 in)." Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:11, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
- Done. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:13, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
- I can't see any mention of protrusible jaw in the reference used, which is weird as the one for S. smaris does. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
- In Spicara smaris there is a single source for the whole description and it has the dimensions that I give in the article and mentions the protrusible jaw. Because the dimensions don't precisely agree in the several different sources used elsewhere in the article, I thought it best to do the whole description section from a single source. I have dealt with the depth range matter. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
