Template:Did you know nominations/Golden-headed cisticola

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 Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:14, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Golden-headed cisticola

edit

5x expanded by SkyGazer 512 (talk) and Aa77zz (talk). Nominated by SkyGazer 512 (talk) at 04:12, 10 January 2019 (UTC).

  • Article has been sufficiently expanded within the requisite timeframe. It is long enough, cited to reliable sources, and neutrally written. I cannot detect any copyvios. The hook is interesting, but is worded too strongly; I would suggest "has been described as" for which the sourcing is good enough. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:21, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
Golden-headed cisticola
Golden-headed cisticola
  • @Vanamonde93: Thank you for the review. How about simply:
  • I'm okay with that. I've struck the original hook to avoid any confusion. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:25, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
  • @Vanamonde93: Sorry that I didn't bring this up until now, but would this image be okay to add to the DYK nomination (considering it is a featured picture there shouldn't be any issues)? I don't think it's likely that this (if promoted) will end up being the lead hook, but I don't think it would hurt to add it to the nomination just in case.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 00:12, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, that should be fine; would you add it to the nom and the hook, and then ping me? Vanamonde (Talk) 01:58, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Approving the modified ALT1, per my previous review and my verification of image use and status, and hook formatting, at this time. Vanamonde (Talk) 03:09, 17 January 2019 (UTC)