Template:Did you know nominations/Colpocephalum

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) 07:03, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Colpocephalum

(

)

Redi's illustration of lice

... that the type species of the louse genus Colpocephalum would have referred to a louse illustrated in the 1600s by Francesco Redi (pictured, left fig.), had the ICZN not intervened? [1] "On the other hand, Nitzsch (1818 : 299) did cite under the genus Colpocephalum one nominal species, Colpocephalum ochraceum Nitzsch, for which he provided an "indication" for the purposes of Article 25 of the Règles, by giving a reference to a previously published drawing. This species was the only one so cited by Nitzsch and is therefore the type species of Colpocephalum Nitzsch by monotypy."[2] "Pulex avis pluvialis Redi exp. fig. sup."
- ALT½:... that the louse genus Colpocephalum's type species would have referred to a 1671 illustration (pictured, left fig.), had the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature not intervened? Source:ibid.
- ALT1:... that the louse genus Colpocephalum had its type species officially changed in order "to avoid disastrous confusion"? [3] "The only way by which disastrous confusion can be avoided in this case is by the International Commission using its Plenary Powers to designate Colpocephalm zebra Burmeister, 1838, to be the type species of the genus Colpocephalum Nitzsch, 1818.
- ALT2:... that the type species of the louse genus Colpocephalum, designated in 1952 by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, was described twenty years after the genus was named? Source: [4] "To be the type species of Colpocephalum Nitzsch, 1818, the nominal species Colpocephalum zebra Burmeister, 1838".

Reviewed: Did you know nominations/Osedax frankpressi

Created by Umimmak (talk). Self-nominated at 01:34, 6 November 2017 (UTC).

Article:

Article is new enough (created Oct 31).
Article is neutral and free from close paraphrasing.
Article is long enough (well over 2,500 characters)

Other:

QPQ: done
Images: freely licensed (I corrected the slide images to {{CC0}}, per source)

Hook:

This is the issue. Albeit factual and references, these hooks are really dull, even to me, a biologist, and hardly interesting to a broad audience. The article currently has essentially zero information on the biology of the genus, save for that it parasitizes birds. A hook that doesn't mention the ICZN, nor the intricacies of taxonomical nomenclature would be much preferred. This would probably require expanding the article: From casual browsing, I've seen that some species have been examined in terms of host co-evolution (e.g. host hawks with low genetic isolation (structuring) harbor C. tubinatum with high isolation, [5]), and hopefully other more interesting facts can be added. I urge a more interesting and simpler hook be proposed before this makes it to the Main Page.

--Animalparty! (talk) 21:18, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

@Animalparty:. The Images are CC by 4.0. CC0 only refers to the textual information on the page... Look at the actual images, e.g., [6]: they clearly say "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/". I'll leave you to revert your change. Noted with hook. Does that need to be done withing 7 days of the article being made, since if so I'm not sure if I'll have much time today to work on the article today (7 days after article creation.) Umimmak (talk) 23:16, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

I see that now about the CC-BY. And DYK generally only requires nomination to be made within 7 days of creation. Some extra time to propose alternative hooks should be fine. --Animalparty! (talk) 23:50, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Yeah it's confusingly stated... I guess stating the image appears at a particular URL is CC0 information, but the image itself is CC4.0? And noted. I'll ping you when I've got some alternate hooks that aren't about its type species designation. Umimmak (talk) 00:16, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

@Animalparty: are any of these interesting?

ALT3:... that, due to their speed, Colpocephalum lice can inhabit regions of their avian hosts which slower lice cannot?
ALT4:... that bird lice in the genus Colpocephalum are "rapid", allowing them to outrun their hosts' preening?
ALT5:... that a species of louse in the Colpocephalum genus has been observed cannibalizing its nymphs and eggs?
ALT6:... that Colpocephalum lice can eat away nearly all of a pigeon's feather fluff in their vent region?
ALT7:... that bird lice in the genus Colpocephalum can live inside flight feathers?
ALT8:... that large infestations of Colpocephalum bird lice can make it harder for pigeons to fly?

Umimmak (talk) 18:48, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

These are better hooks, all more interesting. All are cited and verified. IMO, the best hooks for use are Alt4, Alt5, and Alt8. Striking others, will leave it for listing editor to choose. --Animalparty! (talk) 20:24, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm going to go and strike the original hook for clarity as well since I assume that was just a lapse. Umimmak (talk) 23:15, 12 November 2017 (UTC)