Template:Did you know nominations/Hicksbeachia

17x17px The following is an archived discussion of Hicksbeachia's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you know12x12px (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by Allen3 ^talk 01:14, 25 April 2013 (UTC).

DYK toolbox
DYK check Reviewing guide WMFLabs Dup detector Earwig's Copyvio Detector QPQ check Character count Reviewers' template Disambig links External links Find sources (notability)

Hicksbeachia, Carnarvonia, Cardwellia

• ( Back to T:TDYK )

• ( Article history links: Hicksbeachia
• Carnarvonia
• Cardwellia )

• ... that Ferdinand von Mueller named the rainforest proteaceae genera Buckinghamia, Cardwellia, Carnarvonia, Hicksbeachia and Hollandaea in honour of British Secretaries of State for the Colonies?

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Groenendael Priory, Template:Did you know nominations/Tom French Cup, Template:Did you know nominations/Inheritance (2006), Template:Did you know nominations/Blanc de Hotot, Template:Did you know nominations/Johann Heinrich Baumann
• Comment: expanding unbolded articles so hold off for a mo'. Cardwellia 5x expanded.

Created by Casliber (talk), Macropneuma (talk). Nominated by Casliber (talk) at 20:36, 8 April 2013 (UTC).

• 16px. All three articles verified in respect of length, date and hook referencing. No copy vio noted. All three good to go.--Nvvchar. 02:53, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

16px - Just sticking this in here to delay passing. Let us know when all articles are done! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 16:03, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Last one will be very tricky. Give me 24 hrs.....Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:35, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Buckinghamia 5x expanded now, and have reviewed 5 articles too. Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:03, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

• 16px Remaining two articles need to be reviewed. As far as I can tell, that means the Hollandaea and Buckinghamia articles; Nvvchar's review seems to cover the other three. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:58, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

16px Hollandaea and Buckinghamia are both long enough and new enough. One is new and the other an expansion. The hook ref for these 2 are online but that may not be true of the other 3 which is why I have given an "offline" tick. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:35, 24 April 2013 (UTC)