Template:Did you know nominations/Wildlife of Uganda: Difference between revisions

Wildlife of Uganda, Ugandan kob, Uganda mangabey, Ugandan musk shrew

( Back to T:TDYK )

( Article history links:

• Wildlife of Uganda
• Ugandan kob
• Uganda mangabey
• Ugandan musk shrew

)

Female and calf

• ... that the wildlife of Uganda includes the Ugandan kob (pictured), the Uganda mangabey, and the Ugandan musk shrew? Source: "In Uganda it [the kob] is mainly found in the west and northwest, including in Queen Elizabeth and Murchison Falls NPs"

• Reviewed: Priya Anand (voice actress) Template:Did you know nominations/Isoldé Elchlepp
• Comment: Also reviewed Template:Did you know nominations/Ning Bin, Template:Did you know nominations/Luys i Luso and Template:Did you know nominations/Eddie Gallagher (soldier). Please don't rush to review this because I intend to expand the other article mentioned in the hook. This is now a four-article hook. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:51, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 12:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC).

• @Cwmhiraeth:, are you able to provide a link to the review for "Priya Anand (voice actress)"? I cannot locate it. Flibirigit (talk) 16:20, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

@Flibirigit: I'm not sure about Priya Anand (voice actress), which is ineligible, and rather than waste time sorting out what happened, I have done another review and listed it above. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:56, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

 Doing... Great, thanks. I will start reviewing the articles, and hopefully be done by the end of the weekend. Flibirigit (talk) 03:40, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

• I don't see the Ugandan musk shrew in the body of text in the wildlife of Uganda article. I can't verify the hook, without it being listed. Did I miss something? Flibirigit (talk) 03:57, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

@Flibirigit: Thanks. My understanding is that in a multiple article DYK nomination there is no necessity for one of the articles to mention all the others, and in this case, although I could link Ugandan musk shrew in the main article (Uganda has 345 recorded mammals), there is no necessity to do so as long as the shrew's article states that it occurs in Uganda, which it does. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:24, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

It appears we are going to disagree on citing the hook. I will let another reviewer continue. Flibirigit (talk) 15:25, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

•  Reviewing... –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 03:34, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

  The following claims are unsourced or not supported by the listed source: Uganda mangabey have a larger jaws, the Mabira Forest is being illegally logged, the Ugandan musk shrew is poorly known, and the Ugandan kob can be found in valley-floor grasslands. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 04:11, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

@MJL: Responding to the points you raise.

• 1. I have removed mention of the size of the jaws. It was mentioned somewhere, but I forget now where.
• 2. Source states "forest is also under pressure from illegal timber cutting."
• 3. Source states "Listed as Data Deficient in view of continuing uncertainty as to its extent of occurrence, natural history, threats, conservation status and taxonomic status."
• 4. Source states "Occurs in open and wooded savanna with access to water, as well as riverine and lake-shore grasslands." Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:08, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

  @Cwmhiraeth: Okay, 1 through 3 is great, but is a riverine the same thing as a valley-floor grasslands? –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 19:18, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

@MJL: Well, perhaps not precisely the same, so I have changed the wording. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:28, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth: Sorry for being so tough on ya, but because Wildlife of Uganda was so much larger than the other three, I put off closely looking into it. The exact statement I have issue with is Uganda has ten national parks and thirteen wildlife reserves and sanctuaries, and in these areas, the protection of nature takes precedence over human development. The source goes into detail about how biodiversity is oven (sic) overlooked, but I'm not seeing much info that could support this (I doubled checked this time, I swear- lol). –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 00:08, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

I tried to find a source for you this time, though. I just couldn't find any that weren't travel websites. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 00:10, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

@MJL: I probably got the information from List of protected areas of Uganda which does not have a citation for the information, but probably got it from a dataset like this one, which I cannot open. The ten national parks are listed here. The information is not contentious, but I could remove the wildlife reserves bit I suppose. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:36, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

@Cwmhiraeth: Okay, so that's everything then!

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: There are no further issues with the nomination. All info is sourced or noncontinuous. The hook only contains information that can clearly be found within its constituent articles. All set for the front page! Thank you for you time!! –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 07:59, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

• Unfortunately given the amount of content copied from other articles, Wildlife of Uganda is well short of the expansion requirements. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:03, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

I have to agree with Nikkimaria here, I had completely forgotten about that rule, and will be more careful not to include copied text when I move on to my next "Wildlife" article. I would like to suggest this nomination goes ahead with the approved hook, but with the article Wildlife of Uganda linked but unbolded, like this

• ALT1 ... that the wildlife of Uganda includes the Ugandan kob (pictured), the Uganda mangabey, and the Ugandan musk shrew? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

  @Cwmhiraeth: You have my sincerest apologies for not noticing this ahead of time. @Nikkimaria: Does this hook work? –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 21:25, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

• I have no objection to unbolding the wildlife article. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:43, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

• Okay, restoring the green checkmark. –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 00:56, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

• Note: I have struck the original hook, which had the wildlife article in the bold font, and removed the DYKmake credit for said article while leaving the remaining three DYKmakes intact. I have also moved the new tick to the beginning of the line, where all such DYK icons belong. BlueMoonset (talk) 01:44, 20 August 2019 (UTC)