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) 22:23, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
... that Cryptodidymosphaerites is a hyperparasite of an Eocene tar spot? Source: Currah, Stockey, & LePage (1998) introduction and discussion sections
ALT1: ... that fossils of Cryptodidymosphaerites were discovered using hydrofluoric acid? Source: Currah, Stockey, & LePage (1998) materials and methods
ALT2: ... that Cryptodidymosphaerites is a parasite of a parasite? Source: Currah, Stockey, & LePage (1998) introduction and discussion sections
Overall: @Kevmin: Great article. However, Earwig is reporting a possible copyright violation and i'd like to know why this is the case before I approve it. Onegreatjoke (talk) 13:27, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Onegreatjoke The earwig reports for Fagus langevinii and Carpinus perryae both go to wiki-mirrors that have copied text of articles I previously wrote for taxa that are from the same fossil sites as Cryptodidymosphaerites. As such the paleoecology sections for the three articles are mostly the same since all three were written in the last year-ish.--Kevmin§ 13:42, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Alright. assuming good faith I will approve this nomination. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:27, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
@Kevmin: Great article. However, Earwig is reporting a possible copyright violation and i'd like to know why this is the case before I approve it. Onegreatjoke (talk) 13:27, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
assuming good faith I will approve this nomination. Onegreatjoke (talk) 21:27, 7 October 2022 (UTC)