Template:Did you know nominations/Pacific baza
- The following 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 Yoninah (talk) 16:18, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Pacific baza
[edit]
Pacific baza
- ... that although the generic name of the Pacific baza (pictured) translates to "bird-killer", it is actually a docile and usually unobtrusive species? Source: [1] p. 55, "Both scientific names are drawn from Latin: Aviceda combines avis (bird) with caedere (to kill) - that is, bird-killer, a misnomer; [2] p. 104, "The Pacific Baza is an unobtrusive and docile hawk, usually only obvious during its vocal aerial displays"
- ALT1:... that the Pacific baza (pictured) has been rumoured to imitate the calls of tree-frogs when hunting, persuading them to return the call? Source: [3] p. 104, "It is said to find tree-frogs by imitating their calls and so inducing them to call back"
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Leikeli47
- Comment:
5x expanded by SkyGazer 512 (talk). Self-nominated at 02:59, 20 March 2019 (UTC).
Interesting birds, on good sources, no copyvio obvious. The image is licensed but not too great in stamp size. Please find a hook that is attractive without image. Being docile, unfortunately, will not "sell" well, and "rumored" is not what I like. "baza" told me nothing, how about saying "Pacific cuckoo-falcon" also? - Suggestion: the images in the article - except the lead image - look too big to be placed easily without sandwiching text. Drop one, perhaps. The on now left would be better right, to make the bird "look in ". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:09, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for the thorough review, Gerda Arendt. It is true that the image isn't the best ever, how about this one? I think that would show up better at such a small size. Being docile alone wouldn't sell well, but I found it quite interesting because of the contrast to its generic name, "bird-killer". It's true that ALT1 isn't really a definite fact, I still found it interesting, but I understand if it won't work. The only other thing that I found interesting about the bird is that some specimens held in captivity would not breed without lettuce in their diet, despite the fact that a few decades before there were reports that this bird ate solely meat intentionally and only took in plants by accident. I'm not sure the best way to incorporate this into a hook, however. I could try to search some more or request full access to the hbw article to see if there's anything hooky there. Let me know if you have any particular suggestions.
- I don't want to make the hook much longer by adding "also known as the Pacific cuckoo-falcon", if that's what you're suggesting, but I agree we should somehow point out a common name that readers are familiar with. How about something like "that the hawk Pacific baza"? I don't think we should drop any of the images, as they are all quite helpful for illustration to the readers, but I have aligned all of them right and I see that you have made them smaller. Cheers, --SkyGazer 512 My talk page 13:49, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- How's this?
- ALT2: ... that the Pacific baza is a docile hawk, although its generic name translates to "bird-killer"? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:54, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- The other image shows better, but will probably still not be taken because we have so many bird images that it has to be outstanding ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:56, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: I've gone ahead and replaced the image; if the promoter doesn't think this hook is image-worthy that is fine and makes sense, but there's no problem with having it there just in case. :-) ALT2 looks great to me, thank you!--SkyGazer 512 My talk page 14:01, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Fine, lets look for another reviewer then, unless there's a rush. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:07, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Gerda Arendt: I've gone ahead and replaced the image; if the promoter doesn't think this hook is image-worthy that is fine and makes sense, but there's no problem with having it there just in case. :-) ALT2 looks great to me, thank you!--SkyGazer 512 My talk page 14:01, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
I don't really see anything wrong with the bird picture here (though I'm ambivalent as to whether or not this must be an image hook). I also disagree with Gerda regarding the attractiveness of ALT0, and in fact I think ALT0 is better than ALT2; I don't think ALT2 has the same punch (since hawks are known for being killers anyway). ALT0/ALT2's hook fact is in a Google Books page that I can't access so I guess we can assume good faith on the information regardless. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 11:44, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
This article is a five-fold expansion and is new enough and long enough. The image is not worth using in my opinion, the hook facts of both hooks are cited inline, the article is neutral and I detected no copyright issues. A QPQ has been done. I am rejecting ALT0 and ALT2 because they are referring to the genus name rather than the species, and because the word "docile" should not really be used, its dictionary definition being "submissive, easily managed", neither of which applies to a wild bird. So I am approving ALT1. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:19, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
