Difference between revisions of "Template:Did you know nominations/Odontomachus spinifer"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Kevmin |
imported>Jon Kolbert (Approved, note about links) |
||
| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
::*Not a fan of the review template thing, but whatever. What specifically do you feel needs wikification? I am not and have never claimed to be great at copy-editing, and it is NOT part of the reqirements for nomination or passing of a hook. The reference has been updated.--[[User:Kevmin|<font color="#120A8F">Kev</font>]][[User talk:Kevmin|<font color="#228B22">min</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Kevmin|§]] 01:03, 9 October 2017 (UTC) | ::*Not a fan of the review template thing, but whatever. What specifically do you feel needs wikification? I am not and have never claimed to be great at copy-editing, and it is NOT part of the reqirements for nomination or passing of a hook. The reference has been updated.--[[User:Kevmin|<font color="#120A8F">Kev</font>]][[User talk:Kevmin|<font color="#228B22">min</font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Kevmin|§]] 01:03, 9 October 2017 (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.--> | ||
| + | :::*{{re|Kevmin}} It would be useful if the description section included relative links to terms used such as "[[mesonotum]]" and "[[propodeum]]" but you are right, it's not specifically a requirement for DYK. Feel free to add those if you wish, other than that this DYK is [[File:Symbol confirmed.svg|16px]] good to go. [[User:Jon Kolbert|Jon Kolbert]] ([[User talk:Jon Kolbert|talk]]) 16:47, 11 October 2017 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 16:48, 11 October 2017
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Odontomachus spinifer
- ... that the Dominican amber ant Odontomachus spinifer (pictured) was named for its very large spine? Source: "De Andrade, 1994 etymology section".
- Reviewed: Balanophyllia elegans
Created by Kevmin (talk). Self-nominated at 22:00, 2 October 2017 (UTC).
Looks good. I've added a DOI to the reference so readers can find the resource more easily. Interesting fact! Jon Kolbert (talk) 23:25, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
Template:Ping you should provide a review that explicitly confirms that the five main DYK criteria have been met. Thank you, Yoninah (talk) 22:54, 8 October 2017 (UTC)
Lua error: expandTemplate: template "y" does not exist.
- Not a fan of the review template thing, but whatever. What specifically do you feel needs wikification? I am not and have never claimed to be great at copy-editing, and it is NOT part of the reqirements for nomination or passing of a hook. The reference has been updated.--Kevmin § 01:03, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
- Template:Re It would be useful if the description section included relative links to terms used such as "mesonotum" and "propodeum" but you are right, it's not specifically a requirement for DYK. Feel free to add those if you wish, other than that this DYK is
good to go. Jon Kolbert (talk) 16:47, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
- Template:Re It would be useful if the description section included relative links to terms used such as "mesonotum" and "propodeum" but you are right, it's not specifically a requirement for DYK. Feel free to add those if you wish, other than that this DYK is
