Template:Did you know nominations/Anthophorula persephone

The following discussion 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 Allen3 talk 12:32, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

Anthophorula persephone

edit

Created/expanded by Kevmin (talk). Self nom at 00:26, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

  •  In progress Anne (talk) 20:53, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Length and date fine. Sources reliable with no copy vios. Hook correctly formatted and cited. Article well-written. One small question on wording: I thought you might want to alter "mostly likely." Also, the wording of "host rock being secondary deposits for the amber" makes it sound as though the host rock was the secondary deposit. Thank you for your article and DYK nomination. Anne (talk) 21:26, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
  • I modified the "mostly likely" wording. The sedimentary rocks are possibly the secondary deposit for the amber so that's what should be taken from the wording. It is suggested that the Dominican ambers may have been preserved in a different sedimentary host, and that host rock was then eroded away and the amber redeposited into the formations that host it now.--Kevmin § 04:07, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
  • You're all set! Anne (talk) 04:04, 7 November 2012 (UTC)