Template:Did you know nominations/Cream-spotted cardinalfish

From blackwiki
< Template:Did you know nominations
Revision as of 21:53, 18 October 2014 by imported>Gaff (reply)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

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.
  • 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)
    • 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.
    • "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: