Talk:Neotrombicula fujigmo
 | A fact from Neotrombicula fujigmo appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 20 December 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | It is requested that an image or photograph of Neotrombicula fujigmo be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 13:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
( )
- ... that the mite Neotrombicula fujigmo is named after a profane bit of military slang? Source:
At the close of WWII, I was with final occupation forces in Japan – visited an American officers’ post, over door of one tent was printed sign “FUGIGMO” [more commonly spelled FUJIGMO]. On inquiry of resident, learned it was abbreviation for impatient slogan of GIs to get home . . . “F–k You Jack, I Got My Orders!” Not surprising I didn’t recognize the Japan locality! So when Hank Fuller and I revised a report on Japanese [mites] on return stateside that year he agreed “fugigmo” would be a good species new name; with explanation it was to perpetuate a GI nick name for impatience to get home! [pers. comm. 1985; when finally published the mite was named Trombicula fujigmo Philip and Fuller 1950.]
doi:10.1080/08912963.2019.1618293: 13- ALT1: ... that the mite Neotrombicula fujigmo gets its name from the military acronym "Fuck you, Jack, I got my orders"? Source: ibid
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Virgin in Prayer
- Comment: happy to workshop precise wording
Created by Umimmak (talk). Self-nominated at 00:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
Hook eligibility:
- Cited:
- Interesting:
- Other problems:
| QPQ: Done. |
All points check out, ready to go. For me, both hooks are cited, although the first relies on some paraphrasing. In any event, ALT1 is surely the better of the two. Moonraker (talk) 00:16, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Section order
[edit]I still don't understand why the IP editor wants to move the etymology out of taxonomic history. The taxonomic history section gives temporal context and lets the reader know they were collecting them in 1944-45; right now the etymology jumps into talking about the Allied Forces and V-J day. Just because you think something is the most interesting part of the article doesn't mean it needs to come first; there's also a standard order for Wikipedia articles. I don't claim to WP:OWN this article, other editors can make changes and I'm following you to have the taxonomic history be after the description and distribution; I was just following WP:BRD and reverting the bold change (once) since, to me, it makes sense to talk about the context for its discovery before going into how it was named. Umimmak (talk) 02:20, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- Blah blah. Whine whine whine. Until you understand WP:OWN you'll carry on like this I'm afraid. I find the term "IP editor" to be a Wikipedia pejorative. I've been doing this since 2004 and never had an account. I'm good at what I do and I don't need a made up name and edit tally count to tell me that. I take my lead from precedences and not what I like, for example these well established articles Red imported fire ant, Sawfly, Caddisfly etc all begin with the etymology as the first section. I didn't make the rules but I do follow them. But you go ahead and make up your own rules but don't moan about it when someone with more XP makes changes accordingly. [Yawn] Who cares anyway? You reverted me twice and you were wrong. That's all I need to know about how small you are. Once this is off the main page, this article will be forgotten anyway. So off you toddle with your WP:OWN and feel superior that this article is just the way YOU like it. Hahah.146.199.128.183 (talk) 12:47, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- You really don’t have to be so mean to get your point across. And it was another editor who reverted your edit the second time, and then immediately undid that revert. Wikipedia:Assume good faith and please be WP:NICE. Umimmak (talk) 18:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)