Template:Did you know nominations/Formosibittacus, Jurahylobittacus, and Mongolbittacus

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify it. 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 Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:37, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Formosibittacus, Jurahylobittacus, Mongolbittacus

( Back to T:TDYK )

( Article history links:

• Formosibittacus
• Jurahylobittacus
• Mongolbittacus

)

• ... that the extinct hangingfly genera Formosibittacus, Jurahylobittacus, and Mongolbittacus are only known from the Middle Jurassic of China?

• Reviewed: Xyris tennesseensis
• Reviewed: Ehrlichia Wisconsin HM543746
• Re-reviewed:Boeing 737 MAX with suggestion of an alt1 hook.
• Comment: Note that Mongolbittacus is misspelled in the 2008 paper as "Megolbittacus".

Created/expanded by Kevmin (talk). Self nom at 07:14, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

• New articles. Offline sources. Interesting multi-nomination hook. SL93 (talk) 21:33, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

• This is a triple-nom. Does this mean the nominator needs to do 3 peer reviews? --PFHLai (talk) 14:00, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

• He should, yes. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:15, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Interesting, I haven't been told that multi-noms mean multiple reviews before. Is this noted in the review guidelines somewhere? give me a little to find noms I feel competent to review. o.O --Kevmin § 22:24, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

• Hmm, not in the rules. I will bring this up at WT:DYK. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:44, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
• Reviews completed. Tick based on previous review. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:57, 10 September 2011 (UTC)