Talk:Northern plains gray langur
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Cwmhiraeth in topic Did you know nomination
A fact from Northern plains gray langur appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 11 May 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Did you know nomination
edit- 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 Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:48, 7 May 2020 (UTC)
( )
- ... that ...? although considered sacred to Hindus, Northern plains gray langur monkeys are killed in India for food and to prevent crop raiding.Source: "Local threats include...being hunted by humans for food and in response to crop raiding." McQuinn, Aoife (2016). Rowe, Noel; Myers, Marc (eds.). All the World's Primates. Pogonias Press. pp. 578–579
- Reviewed: Galcerán Bridge
5x expanded by Rlendog (talk). Self-nominated at 21:35, 20 April 2020 (UTC).
- Would you be on board with switching the wording around? Because having "that" and "although" one after the other can come off as a bit convoluted. I was thinking something along the lines of:
- ... that Northern plains gray langur monkeys are killed in India for food and to prevent crop raiding, despite being considered sacred to Hindus? Source: same as original hook
- Hope that's alright with you. If not, feel free to propose another hook. —Bloom6132 (talk) 02:28, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- As for everything else – 5× expansion of March 17, 2020 version completed from 654 characters to 4,432 and nominated 5 days later. No copyvios detected and duplication detector check of online sources [1][2][3] reveal no close paraphrasing issues. Article is well-sourced. AGF ref 9 (verifying the hook) which is offline. QPQ done. —Bloom6132 (talk) 03:28, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- I am fine with the revised hook. Rlendog (talk) 11:58, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- Great – revised hook is 141 characters long (under 200 character max.). Looks good to go! —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:33, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- N.B. this does not count as reviewing my "own" hook. The wording and content is identical to the original – only the word sequencing is different. —Bloom6132 (talk) 15:33, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
- I am fine with the revised hook. Rlendog (talk) 11:58, 21 April 2020 (UTC)