- 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) 05:24, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Glover's pika edit
- ... that the Glover's pika was earlier treated as a subspecies of the Turkestan red pika and the Chinese red pika, but is now treated as an independent species? Chapman, Joseph A.; Flux, John E.C., eds. (1990). Rabbits, Hares and Pikas: Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. Gland, Switzerland: World Conservation Union IUCN. pp. 32–33. ISBN 9782831700199.
- ALT1:... that ...? Source: "You are strongly encouraged to quote the source text supporting each hook" (and [link] the source, or cite it briefly without using citation templates)
5x expanded by Adityavagarwal (talk) and 7&6=thirteen (talk). Nominated by Adityavagarwal (talk) at 17:37, 13 September 2017 (UTC).
5x expanded, in time, long enough, sourced, hook citation checks out (added inline in the article), QPQ done. 7&6=thirteen and Adityavagarwal, why is "Glover's" capitalized when not the first word of the sentence? Also, should it be referred to as "the Glover's pika," or just "Glover's pika" (as in the source)? --Usernameunique (talk) 04:05, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- @Usernameunique: Ah, yeah, it is "the Glover's pika". :P Just like the Thomas's pika, the Smith's red rock hare, etc. (due to names), the Glover's pika should also have the "G" capitalized. This is because "Glover" in the "Glover's pika" is a name. Adityavagarwal (talk) 04:54, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
