Template:Did you know nominations/Abbott's Booby

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:35, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Abbott's Booby[edit]

A juvenile Abbot's Booby

  • ... that if an Abbott's Booby (juvenile pictured) falls to the ground, it is unable to take off and is likely to die from starvation?

Created/expanded by Chipmunkdavis (talk). Self nom at 08:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

  • Length (5x exp) and date are fine. The hook implies that the bird can't then become airborne again, whereas the source shows there are exceptions to this. I suggest the following alternative:
  • ALT1:... that if an Abbott's Booby (juvenile pictured) falls to the ground, it will starve unless it can catch the wind and take off again?
Any thoughts? matt (talk) 21:19, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
I have no objection to the alt, it gets across the same message! Someone once asked me why people are bothering to try and save these birds which can't even take off by themselves. Interesting question indeed! CMD (talk) 13:10, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
I changed one tiny bit of grammer and I have a small suggestion for the very topmost paragraph where you say they occur in a national park, perhaps you could say up there somewhere that it is administered by or in the territory of Australia? I found the article very interesting and I think it would make a very good DYK, and no I didn't know that they couldn't take off again after a fall! Both photos were originally from Flikr and were reviewed by an admin as to their status and useability, so I'm going to assume they are ok. Ellin Beltz (talk) 03:54, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Noted. It'd be a bit weird for it to be under Australian Environmental Protection acts otherwise! CMD (talk) 05:26, 9 April 2012 (UTC)