Template:Did you know nominations/Pyrus ussuriensis
- The following discussion 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 PFHLai (talk) 05:46, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Pyrus ussuriensis[edit]
- ... that the Ussurian pear (pictured) is the hardiest of all pears?
- Comment: ALT1: ... that products made from the Ussurian pear (pictured) may prove more effective than commercial insecticides in killing ticks and mites?
Created by HalfGig (talk). Self nominated at 00:58, 26 January 2014 (UTC).
- Another photo:
Reviewed by Green Giant, using the following criteria:
- Article nominated one day after creation
- Long enough – "1593 characters (257 words) of readable prose size"
- Within policy – neutral, cites sources with inline citations, free of close paraphrasing issues, copyright violations and plagiarism
- →
I recommend that the two offline sources should be linked to online abstracts because the cited facts are stated in the abstracts (see for example, Acaricidal activities and Evaluation of the volatile profile).
- →
- Hook is 57 characters and article is bold and linked
- Hook is interesting and neutral
- → Hook fact does not have an inline citation in the article
- ALT1 is equally interesting and neutral
- The main problem with ALT1 is that the cited source only says "P. ussuriensis fruit-derived material and its derivatives have potential as new preventive agents for the control of stored food mites". So, unless there is a source which supports ALT1, I would recommend rephrasing ALT1.
- QPQ does not apply
- Both images are free and show up well at 100x100, but only the second image is used in the article
- Overall the article meets most of the requirements but needs a citation for the hook and for ALT1. I would recommend using File:Pyrus ussuriensis.jpg, the one that is currently in the article, simply because it shows open flowers whereas the other image shows only partially open flowers.
I also highly recommend linking those two abstracts into the article.Green Giant (talk) 02:16, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
- Added ref after main hook. ALT1 reworded. There is no need to link to the two sources mentioned as they are already linked to, all you have to do is click on the DOI or PMID links. HalfGig talk 02:39, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
- Ah, my mistake. I don't think I've ever used DOI/PMID links before, so it didn't click in my mind to click on the links. Thanks for the quick response. Green Giant (talk) 13:02, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
- Added ref after main hook. ALT1 reworded. There is no need to link to the two sources mentioned as they are already linked to, all you have to do is click on the DOI or PMID links. HalfGig talk 02:39, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
