Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Brookesia ambreensis

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Allen3 talk 00:21, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Brookesia ambreensis

[edit]
(
)

Created/expanded by Thine Antique Pen (talk). Self nom at 13:46, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Reviewed Brookesia ambreensis New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes to alleviate an arguable close paraphrase by changing wording and structure. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 01:43, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia bekolosy New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 02:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia bonsi New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 02:15, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia brygooi New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 02:30, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia confidens New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean.I have a problem with this statement, as its meaning is unclear: Due to the limestone in the area, the habitat that the Brookesia confidens lives in is hard to affect. I think this needs clarification. Other than that, the article seems good to go. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 02:40, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I cannot find any more information on this other than a brief mention, hence I have removed it. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 08:25, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 Done 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:44, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia exarmata New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 02:49, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia griveaudi New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 03:05, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia lambertoni New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 04:06, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia lineata New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 04:17, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia lolontany New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 04:26, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia nasus New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 04:32, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia therezieni New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 04:39, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia thieli New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 04:53, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Reviewed Brookesia valerieae New article. Long enough. I made a minor changes for clarity. DYK Hook supported by many sources. No copyright violation or close paraphrasing issues. Plagiarism checker was clean. Nicely done. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 04:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Comment and question I've completed the reviews of all 14-in-1 DYKs. The question is whether the submitter should have to do a same or similar number. I know that at least some DYKs have not had that requirement. Some do, or at least the question has been raised. I leave that to others with higher rank than me to decide. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:50, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I missed that. Sorry for even raising the question. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:26, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

All reviews completed. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:29, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

REVIEW COMPLETED - The following has been checked in this review by 7&6=thirteen
  • QPQ was done. Is a self-nom, but submitter reviewed a 14-in-one DYK.
  • Articles are all new, large enough and have sufficient characters of readable prose
  • NPOV
  • Hook is interesting (although perhaps somewhat mundane and not real 'catchy'), short enough (given that there are 14 articles) and appropriately referenced. Maybe the hook should briefly describe what these species/chameleons are? Given the number of articles, the 200 character limit should not be an issue.
  • I wouldn't say so. The general hook rules are that after you remove the links to the articles in large hooks, the hook should be under 200 chars. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 12:56, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Precisely my point. Could we put the word "chameleons" in the hook? 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:58, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
Yup; done. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 13:04, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Every paragraph sourced
  • Desk top Duplication Detector run, no copyvio found
GOOD 2 GO 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:41, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
I have shortened the hook by separating the genus name to make it more manageable. Gatoclass (talk) 12:50, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Brookesia_ambreensis&oldid=828906615"