Template:Did you know nominations/Typhlodromips swirskii

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 ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:45, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Typhlodromips swirskii, Common blossom thrips edit

  • ... that the predatory mite Typhlodromips swirskii successfully controls melon thrips on cucumber leaves but fails to control common blossom thrips on the flowers? Source: "Neither species nor rate suppressed F. schultzei in blooms. In contrast, both rates of A. swirskii suppressed T. palmi on leaves"

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 19:56, 15 April 2017 (UTC).

Common blossom thrips: Article is new enough, long enough, and within policy. Earwigs checks out ok. There's one passage that closely mirrors the reference. I'm on the fence as to whether it's close enough to be plagiarism and will let it pass:
Article: "The common blossom thrips causes both direct and indirect damage to the host plant. Both adults and larvae feed on flowers and pollen. The flower tissues are damaged causing discolouration, distortion and stunting, and the flowers may be aborted. Secondary damage is caused by the viruses it can transmit between plants."
Ref: "Frankliniella schultzei can cause both direct and indirect damages to crop. Both adults and nymphs feed on pollen and floral tissue, leading to flower abortion. Severe infestations can cause discoloration and stunted growth of the plant (Amin & Palmer 1985). However, indirect damage by Frankliniella schultzei is due to the virus transmission."
Hook: Within policy. Melon thrips has no cleanup tags or other major issues. I was going to suggest rephrasing it so that control is wikilinked, but then I realized that is what makes it "hooky" (you want to click the link to view the article).
QPQ: Five-article review, so it is sufficient to cover this review and hasn't been overused ([1]).
Pass. AHeneen (talk) 23:01, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
I have rewritten the paragraph mentioned by AHeneen. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:03, 22 April 2017 (UTC)