Template:Did you know nominations/Crassispira incrassata

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 Rjjiii talk 03:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Crassispira incrassata

(

)

... it has been suggested that Crassispira incrassata may be a southern variation of Crassispira bottae and not its own species? Source: https://archive.org/details/seashellsoftropi0000amyr_h1d8
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Dora Goldstein

Improved to Good Article status by Etriusus (talk). Self-nominated at 13:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Crassispira incrassata; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Starting review--Kev min § 15:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

GA new enough and long enough, article is cited and sources are Reliable and neutral. Hook is cited and the confirmed, but the hook is more "confident" then the taxonomy actually is, which rejects the southern population suggestion just as often as accepts.--Kev min § 16:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kevmin:, I added a qualification to that statement. Does this work better? 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 00:48, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kevmin: Please respond to the above. Z1720 (talk) 19:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
That is accurate, but it could be presented with less extra blue links by using "... it has been suggested that Crassispira incrassata...-Kev min § 21:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kevmin: Done. 🏵️Etrius ( Us) 23:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

At this point, everything looks good to go.--Kev min § 16:22, 29 January 2024 (UTC)