Template:Did you know nominations/Banded woodpecker


 * 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  FITINDIA   19:55, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Banded woodpecker

 * ... that the banded woodpecker is of low concern to conservationists because it has adapted well to living in human surroundings? Source: "Has adapted to man-made habitats"
 * Reviewed: George Barbu Știrbei

5x expanded by Cwmhiraeth (talk) and Hanberke (talk). Nominated by Cwmhiraeth (talk) at 11:07, 28 July 2017 (UTC).


 * Symbol question.svgle expansion is new enough and long enough. All paragraphs are cited, with the hook facts sourced, but i dont have access to REF 3 to confirm that it speaks directly to the conservation status.  If it doesnt, it may run into WP:SYNTH.-- Kev  min  § 19:52, 4 August 2017 (UTC) -- Kev  min  § 20:27, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * What the source actually says is "Status: locally common to uncommon. Population size and trends mostly unknown, but considered stable. Has adapted to man-made habitats.". Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:57, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the full quote. I still wonder if using that statement as an assertion for the reason that the population is stable and thus the specific reason that IUCN assessed it as Low Concern may be synth.  Could it be reworded to remove the synth problem?-- Kev  min  § 14:06, 5 August 2017 (UTC)


 * ALT1 ... that the banded woodpecker has adapted well to living in man-made surroundings and is of low concern to conservationists? Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:05, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Symbol voting keep.svg That works much better, gets both section in, follows both references.  No additional problems are identified in the article and no policy issues are present.  Good to go-- Kev  min  § 17:35, 6 August 2017 (UTC)