Template:Did you know nominations/Freyella elegans

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 SL93 (talk) 00:44, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Freyella elegans

(

)

... that the bathypelagic starfish Freyella elegans is probably not a suspension feeder? Source: "Freyellidae ... are probably not suspension feeders" Downey, page 2.

Reviewed: Vorombe

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 06:03, 25 October 2018 (UTC).

General eligibility:

New enough:
Long enough:
Other problems:

Policy compliance:

Adequate sourcing:
Neutral:
Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:
Other problems:

Hook eligibility:

Cited:
Interesting:
Other problems:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: All looks good. Quick query...subphylum says Eleutherozoa, but source says Asterozoa. Please check what I linked, made link in hook same as link in article...bathypelagic Whispyhistory (talk) 12:52, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Well, I have changed the subphylum to Asterozoa because that is what the source, WoRMS, states but then I had to change other articles to be consistent. The trouble is that taxonomy is always evolving, WoRMS changes and the whole thing is unsatisfactory. The article Asterozoa now does not agree with WoRMS but it has an automatic taxobox and is more difficult to adjust. I wish I hadn't started. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:31, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth:. I'm glad you did start. I found it interesting. Evolving terminology is also a problem in medicine. Thanks Whispyhistory (talk) 20:16, 29 October 2018 (UTC)