Template:Did you know nominations/Passenger pigeon

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 Jolly Ω Janner 21:39, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Passenger pigeon edit

(

)

Passenger pigeon in 1896/98

~~... that the extinct passenger pigeon (pictured) was an important source of food for the people of North America?~~

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Poeciliopsis monacha (first of two)

Improved to Good Article status by FunkMonk (talk) 7&6=thirteen (☎). Nominated by Oceanh (talk) at 01:11, 3 January 2016 (UTC).

New GA, long enough, no copyvio detected (just mirrors.), image is PD, hook is interesting and cited inline, QPQ done, looks good. Keilana (talk) 06:28, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

@FunkMonk:, @Oceanh:, @Keilana: - I think we can find some better hooks, including:

ALT1 .... that the demise of the passenger pigeon (pictured) in 1914 has been described as one of the greatest and most senseless extinctions induced by humans?

ALT2 .... that in 19th-century America, any amateur hunter could kill six passenger pigeons in a single shot?

ALT3 .... that in 1886, a flock of over 3.5 billion passenger pigeons in southern Ontario was described as 300 miles (480 km) long and took 14 hours to pass?

I'm sure if I ask @EEng: and @Martinevans123: nicely, they can come up with a thigh-slapping hook, I'm sure. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 20:50, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

How about going for that hilarious Frankenpigeon angle?

ALT4 .... that it has been suggested the passenger pigeon may be revived by "de-extinction", using genetic material from 1,532 pigeon skins and 16 pigeon skeletons?

Hardly thigh-slapping, but plenty of material in that article to work on yet. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Have to agree, being food for Native Americans isn't what this bird is best known for. FunkMonk (talk) 11:02, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

The original hook doesn't say Native Americans, merely "the people of North America" (which could include everyone living in Alaska and Panama), and I don't even think it was that important - certainly from reading the article the most important time it was food was for the lower classes in the 19th century. I'll strike it. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:31, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Full review of ALTs required. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:31, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok, so I think since I didn't propose any of the ALTs I can review them. They're all cited inline etc, but I prefer ALT4 or ALT2. The article's good to go regardless. Keilana (talk) 22:18, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

If a fact about hunting or extinction is used, this image of a shooting might be better:[1] FunkMonk (talk) 22:36, 10 January 2016 (UTC)