Template:Did you know nominations/Ursine tree-kangaroo

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 00:17, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Ursine tree-kangaroo

(

)

Ursine tree-kangaroo by John Gould

... that the ursine tree-kangaroo (pictured) is rated as "vulnerable" as it is hunted for food and its numbers are decreasing? Source: "This species is threatened by hunting by local people for food" and "It has lost a significant portion of its range (and hence population) in the last 60-70 years."

Reviewed: Nicholas Muellner

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 18:37, 8 April 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: @Cwmhiraeth: Expanded >5*, copyvio 2%, sources checked, all cited. Fascinating kangaroo. All clear as far as I can see. Out of interest, why 'fawn' not 'brown' when source says coffee-colour underside and why 40 cm when source says tail from 41cm? Whispyhistory (talk) 15:45, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

And why not use the image in the article? Philafrenzy (talk) 15:56, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

@Whispyhistory: I thought fawn was as good as brown when the source stated coffee-coloured - I was thinking of milky coffee. Tail length, well, I rounded it; if the range had been 41 to 54 cm, I would have quoted it accurately, but here it is 41 to 94 cm. As for the picture, I was not too bothered. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:17, 9 April 2018 (UTC)