Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Asplenium tutwilerae"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Choess
(problem fixed)
imported>Sasata
(tick)
Line 22: Line 22:
  
 
:*<!--Make first comment here-->
 
:*<!--Make first comment here-->
*[[File:Symbol question.svg|16px]] Article length and date ok, all hooks of acceptable length. No problems with close paraphrasing. Original hook can't be used yet, as the article does not explicitly say that Julia Tutwiler was a prison reformer. ALT1 confirmed, but the phrase "classified with" might be confusing; the average reader will probably not know that means "was considered the same species as". ALT2 confirmed. Of these three, I think the original hook is the most interesting. As a perhaps more accessible version of ALT1, how about:
+
*Article length and date ok, all hooks of acceptable length. No problems with close paraphrasing. Original hook can't be used yet, as the article does not explicitly say that Julia Tutwiler was a prison reformer. ALT1 confirmed, but the phrase "classified with" might be confusing; the average reader will probably not know that means "was considered the same species as". ALT2 confirmed. Of these three, I think the original hook is the most interesting. As a perhaps more accessible version of ALT1, how about:
  
 
::'''ALT3''': ... that although discovered in 1873, '''[[Tutwiler's spleenwort]]''' was not considered a distinct species until 2007?
 
::'''ALT3''': ... that although discovered in 1873, '''[[Tutwiler's spleenwort]]''' was not considered a distinct species until 2007?
Line 32: Line 32:
 
::this last one leaves some mystery as to why it all of a sudden became so rare. [[User:Sasata|Sasata]] ([[User talk:Sasata|talk]]) 06:48, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 
::this last one leaves some mystery as to why it all of a sudden became so rare. [[User:Sasata|Sasata]] ([[User talk:Sasata|talk]]) 06:48, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 
:::I've added a source to the article for Tutwiler's occupations, so the original hook should now be OK. [[User:Choess|Choess]] ([[User talk:Choess|talk]]) 00:54, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 
:::I've added a source to the article for Tutwiler's occupations, so the original hook should now be OK. [[User:Choess|Choess]] ([[User talk:Choess|talk]]) 00:54, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
 +
*{{DYKtick}} All hooks now verified. [[User:Sasata|Sasata]] ([[User talk:Sasata|talk]]) 04:12, 4 July 2012 (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 04:12, 4 July 2012

Asplenium tutwilerae

Created/expanded by Choess (talk). Self nom at 02:34, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Article length and date ok, all hooks of acceptable length. No problems with close paraphrasing. Original hook can't be used yet, as the article does not explicitly say that Julia Tutwiler was a prison reformer. ALT1 confirmed, but the phrase "classified with" might be confusing; the average reader will probably not know that means "was considered the same species as". ALT2 confirmed. Of these three, I think the original hook is the most interesting. As a perhaps more accessible version of ALT1, how about:
ALT3: ... that although discovered in 1873, Tutwiler's spleenwort was not considered a distinct species until 2007?

or maybe

ALT4: ... that, originally discovered in 1873, Tutwiler's spleenwort became one of the world's rarest ferns in 2007?
this last one leaves some mystery as to why it all of a sudden became so rare. Sasata (talk) 06:48, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
I've added a source to the article for Tutwiler's occupations, so the original hook should now be OK. Choess (talk) 00:54, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol confirmed.svg All hooks now verified. Sasata (talk) 04:12, 4 July 2012 (UTC)