In this article we will explore
Template:Did you know nominations/Parastemmiulus in depth, a topic that has sparked great interest and debate in recent years. From its origins to its relevance today,
Template:Did you know nominations/Parastemmiulus has captured the attention of various spheres of society. Through an exhaustive analysis, we will examine the different edges that make up
Template:Did you know nominations/Parastemmiulus, as well as their implications in different contexts. In addition, we will emphasize the evolution of
Template:Did you know nominations/Parastemmiulus over time, highlighting its impact in different areas and its influence on decision making. By weighing the various points of view on
Template:Did you know nominations/Parastemmiulus, we seek to provide a comprehensive perspective that enriches the understanding of this topic that is so relevant today.
- 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 Allen3 talk 13:47, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
Parastemmiulus
Created by Kevmin (talk). Self-nominated at 02:50, 17 November 2015 (UTC).
- Article is new and long enough, neutral, interesting and appropriately cited. Hook fact is NOT SUPPORTED IN THE ARTICLE, as far as I can see. Spot checks did not reveal close paraphrasing. QPQ done. Oceanh (talk) 14:45, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Oceanh: I've clarified the hook, with addition of material to the article (sorry!)--Kevmin § 02:46, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you. Since the hook fact is not found in the abstract of the cited source, I have to AGF on the rest of the journal artcicle (which is behind a paywall). Oceanh (talk) 21:05, 18 November 2015 (UTC)