Template:Did you know nominations/Resplendent quetzal

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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 20:04, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Resplendent quetzal

(

• Back to T:TDYK
• Article history

)

Male resplendent quetzal

• ... that the resplendent quetzal was venerated by the Aztec and Maya? Source: https://abcbirds.org/bird/resplendent-quetzal/
  • ALT1: ... that killing a resplendent quetzal was a crime in Aztec and Maya law? Source: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10745-016-9827-8
  • ALT2: ... that because Aztec and Maya law forbade killing a resplendent quetzal, the birds were only caught, had some feathers plucked, and were released again? Source: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10745-016-9827-8
  • ALT3: ... that resplendent quetzal were once so precious they were used as a medium of exchange, and the modern currency of Guatemala is named after the bird? Source: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10745-016-9827-8 and https://www.britannica.com/animal/quetzal
  • ALT4: ... that the resplendent quetzal was considered divine by the Aztec and Maya, and associated with the god Quetzalcoatl? Source: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10745-016-9827-8
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Wind power in Turkey
  • Comment: Other hooks and images possible. And really, I think this could benefit tremendously from a picture spot.

Improved to Good Article status by SpaceEconomist192 (talk). Nominated by LordPeterII (talk) at 18:22, 30 September 2022 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @LordPeterII Good article! My main problem is that while hooks 1 and alt1 are sourced hooks alt2-4 are not. Im going to approve the hooks once they're all cited. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:09, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Not a review, just a comment. I really like this article. Would be great for DYK once the ALT2-4 hooks are cited here. I would lean for ALT1 or ALT3. Really good nom. Soulbust (talk) 14:23, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

@LordPeterII: since it's been a week. Onegreatjoke (talk) 12:30, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

@Onegreatjoke: Technically, they were all cited in the article (which is the actual requirement), I only didn't repeat them all here since I thought of ALT2–4 a bit later, and then frankly forgot. The source is actually the same for most ALTs, but I've added a more explicit source to the article for the currency name. –LordPeterII (talk) 09:09, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

Alright Approving Onegreatjoke (talk) 18:01, 12 October 2022 (UTC)