Template:Did you know nominations/Squid

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 97198 (talk) 14:44, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Squid

(

)

... that squid can move by jet propulsion and some species can even fly?
- ALT1:... that the eyes of some squid are bigger than footballs and among the largest eyes ever to exist in the animal kingdom?
- ALT2:... that some squid have two types of eye, a tubular one that looks upwards and a normally formed eye pointing forward and downward?

Reviewed: Pierre Cangioni

Improved to Good Article status by Chiswick Chap (talk) and Ceranthor (talk). Nominated by Cwmhiraeth (talk) at 07:25, 31 January 2019 (UTC).

its an easy review so I will leave that for someone who needs the QPQ. The nomination omitted the sources, but the article cites the following: jet propulsion A Study in Jet Propulsion: An Analysis of the Motion of the Squid page 155. Flying squid: Fact or Fiction: Can a Squid Fly out of Water?. Football sized eye: Colossal squid's big eye revealed. Tubular eye: Histioteuthidae Verrill, 1881 Of course if no-one takes it up I will happily do so. Comments: Would jet propulsion be better linked to Aquatic locomotion#Jet propulsion? Is there a decent picture that would tie in with any of the hooks? That squid can fly is so obviously fake, despite being true, that it would be a good hook for 1 April, especially with a picture. Find bruce (talk) 23:16, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you. I have altered the hook jet propulsion link, but haven't found any suitable images. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:34, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Find bruce for adding the links and making the review even easier. I need a few QPQs so I'll take up on your offer. The article is new enough (recent GA), long enough, and well written. Hooks are interesting (I like AL1 the best and ALT0 next) and verified with supplied sources. QPQ is done. No copyvio detected. I agree an image would be nice, but that's not a requirement. Good to go. -Zanhe (talk) 06:49, 5 February 2019 (UTC)