Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Acacia denticulosa"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>SimonTrew (Ety) |
imported>SimonTrew (That threw me and will throw others) |
||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
:* [[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] Length (>5x), date, hook's ref verified. Img is from Commons and looks great at this size so I'd recommend making this the set's lead hook. No apparent close-paraphrasing. Interesting hook. QPQ is done. GTG. --[[User:Rosiestep|Rosiestep]] ([[User talk:Rosiestep|talk]]) 20:04, 10 May 2014 (UTC) | :* [[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] Length (>5x), date, hook's ref verified. Img is from Commons and looks great at this size so I'd recommend making this the set's lead hook. No apparent close-paraphrasing. Interesting hook. QPQ is done. GTG. --[[User:Rosiestep|Rosiestep]] ([[User talk:Rosiestep|talk]]) 20:04, 10 May 2014 (UTC) | ||
| − | ::'''Comment'''. Could we have a bit in the | + | ::'''Comment'''. Could we have a bit earlier in the lede to the etymology of its latin name? It is well-referenced but not mentioned at first sight, which threw me: as I checked the refs and couldn't find it until I got to section 1, "Taxonomy". If that throws me it will throw others, I come as an intelligent but ignorant reader: and so do millions of others. [[User:SimonTrew|Si Trew]] ([[User talk:SimonTrew|talk]]) 22:57, 15 May 2014 (UTC) |
{{-}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> | {{-}}}}<!--Please do not write below this line or remove this line. Place comments above this line.--> | ||
Revision as of 23:02, 15 May 2014
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Acacia denticulosa
- ... that the threatened sandpaper wattle (pictured) is extinct at the site it was first collected?
- ALT1: ... that the threatened sandpaper wattle (pictured) flowers within a year of being grown from seed?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Nicholas Snowman
5x expanded by Casliber (talk), Melburnian (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 07:50, 10 May 2014 (UTC).
- Comment. Could we have a bit earlier in the lede to the etymology of its latin name? It is well-referenced but not mentioned at first sight, which threw me: as I checked the refs and couldn't find it until I got to section 1, "Taxonomy". If that throws me it will throw others, I come as an intelligent but ignorant reader: and so do millions of others. Si Trew (talk) 22:57, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
