Talk:Southern greater glider

A fact from Southern greater glider appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 19 September 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that in 2020, scientists confirmed that the southern greater glider (pictured), northern greater glider and central greater glider were not one species as had previously been believed?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/September. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Southern greater glider.

Mammals Low‑importance

	Mammals portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MammalsWikipedia:WikiProject MammalsTemplate:WikiProject Mammalsmammal articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia: Biota Low‑importance

	Australia portal Southern greater glider is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Did you know nomination[edit]

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 Theleekycauldron (talk) 04:33, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

( Comment or view )

( Article history links:

)

Light morph of a southern greater glider

... that in 2020 scientists confirmed that the southern greater glider (pictured), northern greater glider and central greater glider were not one species as had previously been believed? Source: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/nov/06/two-new-greater-glider-species-discovered-australias-biodiversity-just-got-a-lot-richer
- ALT1:... that scientists used to believe that the southern greater gliders (pictured), northern greater glider, and central greater glider were one species? Source: same as above

Created by Geekgecko (talk). Nominated by BuySomeApples (talk) at 21:57, 27 August 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Southern great glider

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: Article is new enough and long enough, no copyvio detected, and is well-sourced. The image is clear and will look good. Lajmmoore (talk) 06:38, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Northern great glider

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:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article is well-referenced with copy vio unlikely, it is new enough. My only comment is that it is just over 1500 charaters, So I wondered if a sentence about its diet (or something) might move it move comfortably over the suggested character limit (plus I'm curious)! Lajmmoore (talk) 06:38, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Central greater glider

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:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article is well-referenced with copy vio unlikely, its new enough and long enough, and is interesting. Overall I prefer ALT0. Lajmmoore (talk) 06:38, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ALT0 to T:DYK/P6