Template:Did you know nominations/Tree of life (biology)
- 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 Cielquiparle (talk) 14:10, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Tree of life (biology)
- ... that Ernst Haeckel's 1866 tree of life model has been described as "the earliest 'tree of life' model of biodiversity"? Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/540038a
Improved to Good Article status by Chiswick Chap (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 14:21, 5 November 2022 (UTC).
Reviewing... Your Power 🐍 💬 "What did I tell you?"
📝 "Don't get complacent..." 01:21, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
Policy compliance:
- Adequate sourcing:
- Neutral:
- Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
- ?
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
First thing first: Earwig is giving me an... interesting copyvio score. Rightfully so - we have a very large Darwin quote that takes up 60% of my screen. Since Origin is in the public domain, the article should indicate that it incorporates much of its text from public domain sources. Template:Source-attribution helps with this. With regards to neutrality, I am not seeing any WP:DUE or WP:FRINGE red flags, which is good for something closely related to a controversial topic like evolution. Would like to stress, however, that I don't have any expertise on biology, so anyone who does is welcome to provide their second opinion on the article here.
Furthermore, the hook seems run-of-the-mill - I would suggest making the hook about Darwin's seminal work as his name is more well-known to a general audience. Something like ... that Charles Darwin conceptualized his theory of evolution using a "tree of life" model?
would be good. Another optional suggestion would be to incorporate an image there and bam, more readers hooked. Your Power 🐍 💬 "What did I tell you?"
📝 "Don't get complacent..." 13:15, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Your Power: I mean, we could do Alt1 "... that Charles Darwin used a tree of life model to conceptualize his theory of evolution." Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:46, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Onegreatjoke: that's broadly interesting enough. Just waiting for the copyvio issues to be addressed before we approve this
Your Power 🐍 💬 "What did I tell you?"
📝 "Don't get complacent..." 08:41, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Onegreatjoke: that's broadly interesting enough. Just waiting for the copyvio issues to be addressed before we approve this
- @Your Power: Got rid of the blockquote. Is that good enough? Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:34, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- Deletion of the material is not appropriate. Use the Source attribution template as advised above if it's thought really necessary - I can't see why it should be, as all Darwin text is PD as he died in 1882, so his writings have all been PD since 1 January 1953. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:40, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Chiswick Chap: WP:FREECOPY, a subsection of WP:PLAGIARISM, urges to use attribution templates when copying material from free sources (PD, CC licences compatible with enwiki, etc). I do agree that removing that long quotation was not the best, however. Your Power 🐍 💬 "What did I tell you?"
📝 "Don't get complacent..." 04:18, 20 November 2022 (UTC)- Feel free to add it if it's troubling you. I was not consulted about starting this process and have no interest in its outcome. Chiswick Chap (talk) 05:28, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Chiswick Chap: WP:FREECOPY, a subsection of WP:PLAGIARISM, urges to use attribution templates when copying material from free sources (PD, CC licences compatible with enwiki, etc). I do agree that removing that long quotation was not the best, however. Your Power 🐍 💬 "What did I tell you?"
- Deletion of the material is not appropriate. Use the Source attribution template as advised above if it's thought really necessary - I can't see why it should be, as all Darwin text is PD as he died in 1882, so his writings have all been PD since 1 January 1953. Chiswick Chap (talk) 22:40, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Your Power: Got rid of the blockquote. Is that good enough? Onegreatjoke (talk) 22:34, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Onegreatjoke and Your Power: There hasn't been any movement with this nomination since November, have any issues been sorted out yet? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 11:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- I don't exactly know how use an attribution template so someone will have to teach me or do it themselves. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
- I've tried to address this. The usage instructions at Template:Source-attribution didn't cover how to use it with other referencing templates like {{sfnp}}. After looking at some other articles that use the template, I modified the instance of the quote to {{sfn}} and added it in the
|loc=comment. Not sure if this is exactly what the reviewer wanted. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:45, 15 January 2023 (UTC)- @Your Power: Is it good now? Onegreatjoke (talk) 15:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
- I've tried to address this. The usage instructions at Template:Source-attribution didn't cover how to use it with other referencing templates like {{sfnp}}. After looking at some other articles that use the template, I modified the instance of the quote to {{sfn}} and added it in the
- I don't exactly know how use an attribution template so someone will have to teach me or do it themselves. Onegreatjoke (talk) 17:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
New reviewer needed to finish this nomination; prior reviewer has not responded, and this nominations is three months old today. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:33, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
A public-domain attribution template has been added to the citation, as was requested; the formatting is a little weird, but it's nothing that should prevent it running at DYK. Hook ALT1 is fine and likelier to draw in an average reader, as the previous reviewer said. Good work! -Bryan Rutherford (talk) 19:30, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
