Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Cream-spotted cardinalfish"

From blackwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Gaff
(reply)
imported>AshLin
(Comments & Good to go)
Line 23: Line 23:
  
 
:* Began review, new enough, long enough. [[User:AshLin|AshLin]] ([[User talk:AshLin|talk]]) 11:36, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
 
:* Began review, new enough, long enough. [[User:AshLin|AshLin]] ([[User talk:AshLin|talk]]) 11:36, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
:* Info clumped up, seperated it into sections, makes it more readable. Done.
+
:* Info clumped up, seperated it into sections, makes it more readable. {{Done}}.
 
:* {{ping|Gaff}} Hook just not interesting enough - there are many monotypic genera. Please suggest alternatives not invoving monotypic genus status.
 
:* {{ping|Gaff}} Hook just not interesting enough - there are many monotypic genera. Please suggest alternatives not invoving monotypic genus status.
:* Please use [[Template:Convert]] for depth range to show depth both in feet and meters.
+
:* Please use [[Template:Convert]] for depth range to show depth both in feet and meters.{{done}}
:* The superfluous words "Ref Ref. 90102" & "TL male/unsexed" shows sloppy cut & paste from Fishbase. Please be careful, it also implies that copyvio/close paraphrasing issues may exist. [[User:AshLin|AshLin]] ([[User talk:AshLin|talk]]) 14:19, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
+
:* The superfluous words "Ref Ref. 90102" & "TL male/unsexed" shows sloppy cut & paste from Fishbase. Please be careful, it also implies that copyvio/close paraphrasing issues may exist. [[User:AshLin|AshLin]] ([[User talk:AshLin|talk]]) 14:19, 18 October 2014 (UTC){{done}}
:** Yes, besides the two copyvios, there are close paraphrasing issues also - " a single pore above and below the raised median canal on each pored lateral line scale", please rephrase this.
+
:** Yes, besides the two copyvios, there are close paraphrasing issues also - " a single pore above and below the raised median canal on each pored lateral line scale", please rephrase this.{{done}}
 
:** "color patterns present on the head body and vertical fins and"
 
:** "color patterns present on the head body and vertical fins and"
 
:** "apogonichthys foa fowleria and neamia"
 
:** "apogonichthys foa fowleria and neamia"
Line 37: Line 37:
 
:* '''ALT5''' ... that this summer a nocturnal [[mouthbrooder]], the '''[[Ozichthys|cream-spotted cardinalfish]]''', was found to be the sole member of a new genus of tropical fish? <em>&mdash;<font color="Indigo">[[User:Gaff|Gaff]]</font> <sup><small><b><font color="MediumSlateBlue">[[User_talk:Gaff|ταλκ]]</font></b></small></sup></em> 21:53, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
 
:* '''ALT5''' ... that this summer a nocturnal [[mouthbrooder]], the '''[[Ozichthys|cream-spotted cardinalfish]]''', was found to be the sole member of a new genus of tropical fish? <em>&mdash;<font color="Indigo">[[User:Gaff|Gaff]]</font> <sup><small><b><font color="MediumSlateBlue">[[User_talk:Gaff|ταλκ]]</font></b></small></sup></em> 21:53, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  
 +
I recommend a mish-mash of of the above, composed from two seperate sentences in the text & duly referenced inline.
 +
:* '''ALT6'''  ... that the '''[[Ozichthys|cream-spotted cardinalfish]]''', the sole member of a new genus of tropical fish, ''[[Ozichthys]]'', described in 2014, is a [[nocturnal]] [[mouthbrooder]]? {{done}}
 +
[[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] Good to go
 +
[[User:AshLin|AshLin]] ([[User talk:AshLin|talk]]) 07:22, 19 October 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 07:22, 19 October 2014

Ozichthys albimaculosus

Created/expanded by Gaff (talk). Self nominated at 21:14, 28 September 2014 (UTC).

  • Began review, new enough, long enough. AshLin (talk) 11:36, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Info clumped up, seperated it into sections, makes it more readable.  Done.
  • Template:Ping Hook just not interesting enough - there are many monotypic genera. Please suggest alternatives not invoving monotypic genus status.
  • Please use Template:Convert for depth range to show depth both in feet and meters. Done
  • The superfluous words "Ref Ref. 90102" & "TL male/unsexed" shows sloppy cut & paste from Fishbase. Please be careful, it also implies that copyvio/close paraphrasing issues may exist. AshLin (talk) 14:19, 18 October 2014 (UTC) Done
    • Yes, besides the two copyvios, there are close paraphrasing issues also - " a single pore above and below the raised median canal on each pored lateral line scale", please rephrase this. Done
    • "color patterns present on the head body and vertical fins and"
    • "apogonichthys foa fowleria and neamia"
  • Please reconcile these & ping me or place a message on my talk page. AshLin (talk) 14:27, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Template:Ping Thank you for the review. Copyvio/close paraphrasing concerns have (hopefully) been adequately addressed. Sadly, your concerns about the hook not being of interest may prove insurmountable, in which case, I'll abandon this as a candidate. To a lay reader such as myself (physician by trade), a new genus of fish being described this year (2 months ago) seems interesting enough. (At least as, if not more, interesting than 2 out of 5 DYK noms.)[citation needed] But, I'm happy to work with you... How about these? One emphasizes the timeliness of the entry, another notes some interesting features of the fish, and one does both:

I recommend a mish-mash of of the above, composed from two seperate sentences in the text & duly referenced inline.

Symbol confirmed.svg Good to go AshLin (talk) 07:22, 19 October 2014 (UTC)