- 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 G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 19:58, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Nile Delta toad, Amietophrynus vittatus
edit( Back to T:TDYK )
( Article history links: )
- ... that toads found in Egypt around 1909 and identified as Degen's toad (A. vittatus) are now considered a separate species, the Nile Delta toad (A. kassasii)?
- Reviewed: Apterostigma electropilosum
- Comment: Also reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/The Fat Cow. - Yes, species get misidentified all the time, but there is more to this story than most instances!
5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self nominated at 09:14, 11 September 2014 (UTC).
@Cwmhiraeth: The source relating to the hook itself is a paid online resource, but in the summary which I didn't need to pay for, it says the species was misidentified in 1906 as Bufo vittatus. This matches neither the hook nor the article. ~ R.T.G 21:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
- And that is specific to Nile Delta toad ~ R.T.G 21:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
- @RTG: I can see your difficulty! Both toads were originally included in the genus Bufo but in 2006, Frost split the large genus Bufo and created a new genus Amietophrynus to accommodate the African species. A bit complex for DYK. How about ALT1? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:16, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
- ALT1 ... that toads found in Egypt around 1909 and identified as Degen's toad are now considered a separate species, the Nile Delta toad?
Note: ALT0 or ALT1 no particular opinion. Review:Ticks all the boxes, prose, hook, sourced (1 paid online journal accounting a few sentences I didn't review), ~ R.T.G 12:24, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
