Template:Did you know nominations/Halictus? savenyei
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. 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 Redtigerxyz Talk 13:22, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Halictus? savenyei
edit- ... that the extinct sweat bee Halictus? savenyei was the first bee described from Canadian fossils deposits?
- Reviewed: Persoonia myrtilloides
Created/expanded by Kevmin (talk). Self nom at 23:00, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
| Format | Citation | Neutrality | Interest |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stemonitis (talk) | Stemonitis (talk) | Stemonitis (talk) | Stemonitis (talk) |
| Length | Newness | Adequate citations |
Formatted citations |
Reliable sources |
Neutrality | Plagiarism |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stemonitis (talk) | Stemonitis (talk) | Stemonitis (talk) | Stemonitis (talk) | Stemonitis (talk) | Stemonitis (talk) | Stemonitis (talk) |
- When I read the hook, I immediately thought it would be better to rephrase it as "the first fossil bee from Canada", rather than "the first bee [...] from Canadian fossils deposits". I now realise that you probably avoided this wording to avoid it being seen as plagiarism from the cited source. However, the fact that such a wording is very likely to be arrived at independently (i.e. it is the natural way of describing that fact), I think the shorter version should be acceptable. If anyone else has other thoughts on the issue, I would gladly hear them. Until then, I recommend ALT1:
- ALT1: ... that the sweat bee Halictus? savenyei was the first fossil bee from Canada to be described?