Template:Did you know nominations/Elongatoolithidae


 * 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 Miyagawa (talk) 23:36, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Elongatoolithidae

 * ... that fossil eggs classified as Elongatoolithidae (pictured) have been found with preserved embryos inside?


 * ALT1:... that Elongatoolithidae (pictured) is the oofamily containing the fossil eggs of oviraptorosaurs?
 * Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Ai Xia

Created by Ashorocetus (talk). Self-nominated at 01:33, 9 December 2015 (UTC).


 * Symbol confirmed.svg This article is new enough and long enough. The hook fact is well sourced, the image is appropriately licensed, the article is neutral and I did not detect any copyright issues. One further point, the article wikilinks "oofamily", and this redirects to "Egg fossil", so this makes the opening sentence of the article start "Elongatoolithidae is an egg fossil of fossil eggs", and the ALT1 hook above read "... that Elongatoolithidae (pictured) is the egg fossil containing the fossil eggs of oviraptorosaurs?", so I have struck it. If you were to create a stub article for "oofamily", that would solve the problem. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your review! I just want to point out that "oofamily" means a family of fossil eggs, i.e., it's not just "fossil egg". I changed the redirect to the section egg fossil. Anyhow, I'm just being pedantic; I prefer the first hook anyway and the linking issue doesn't affect much. Ashorocetus (talk &#124; contribs) 02:02, 19 December 2015 (UTC)