Template:Did you know nominations/Thomas W. Whitaker


 * 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 97198 (talk) 01:05, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Thomas W. Whitaker

 * ... that Thomas W. Whitaker did more to increase the knowledge of squashes and pumpkins (pictured) than any one person?
 * Reviewed: Maximowicz's vole
 * Comment: moved to main article space 10 Nov 2014

Created by HalfGig (talk), Sminthopsis84 (talk). Nominated by HalfGig (talk) at 00:59, 10 November 2014 (UTC).
 * Ridiculous. You can't increase the knowledge of squashes and pumpkins because squashes and pumpkins, like some people, don't have brains. EEng (talk) 05:44, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * There's no need to insult me.   HalfGig   talk  10:17, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Someone apparently thought "some people" was directed at him (or her) specifically. While I have no idea why he (or she) would think that, I want to make clear that it was not, in fact, directed at him (or her), whoever he (or she) is, nor indeed anyone in particular. We've all know punkin heads, however, as well as people who are quick to take offense. EEng (talk) 16:50, 10 November 2014 (UTC) P.S. Don't change hooks in place in a way that makes nonsense of comments already posted.
 * And we all know people who are unnecessarily cold, callous, and insensitive. You could have easily made your point in an adult manner without any hint of mockery nor derision.  HalfGig   talk  18:01, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * A cynical jab at the world in general isn't mockery or derision. We wouldn't be having this discussion except for your inexplicable idea that I was talking about you, and I can't imagine why you keep calling attention to that. EEng (talk) 18:38, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The reason we're having this discussion, and I use that term loosely, is that you are so callous that you don't even see the problem with your behavior.   HalfGig   talk  18:48, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * No, the reason we're having this discussion (and there's no loose use of the term here) is that when I wrote "pumpkins, like some people, have no brains" you jumped up from a crowd of millions of editors and shouted -- "Me! You're talking about me! I know it!". Perhaps you're familiar with the adage, "If the shoe fits, wear it." You may now wish to have the last word -- be my guest. EEng (talk) 19:20, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * And anyway, Mr "Clever-Cabbage" EEng, you're just plain wrong. So there! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:11, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * ME123, you're like a fixed, unchanging star in an uncertain universe. EEng (talk) 19:20, 10 November 2014 (UTC) Going supernova any time soon?
 * "A supernova? No, a potato" Martinevans123 (talk) 19:25, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Or the Great Pumpkin. You and I are like the Rosencrantz and Guildenstern of DYK. EEng (talk) 19:51, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Exactly. - Tomáš "Slapstick" Straussler.


 * Made slight copyedit for clarity.  13:44, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * ALT1 ... that Thomas W. Whitaker did more to increase knowledge about squashes and pumpkins (pictured) than any other person?
 * Agree that's better. Thank you Zad68.  HalfGig   talk  14:29, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Excellent image, I like pumpkins! Interesting article on good sources, long enough and brandnew. I am afraid that I don't understand what "Whitaker was honored with his eponymous summer squash variety: Cucurbita pepo summer-squash zucchini variety (Whitaker)." means. (We don't really need a link to zucchini at the end of that article, and not in what may be a name, - but that's what is not clear to me. If yes, quotation marks please.) - However, the hook fact has no inline citation right behind it, and the citation after the next sentence doesn't support it or I couldn't find it. Difficult wording anyway, an ALT2 would be appreciated ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:03, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * "Whitaker was honored with his eponymous summer squash variety: Cucurbita pepo summer-squash zucchini variety (Whitaker)." In the botany world, it's considered an honor to have a species, cultivar, or variety named after you. In this case we have a zucchini squash variety named after Whitaker. I've tried to fix your points about the article. How about:
 * ALT2 ... that botanist Thomas W. Whitaker was honored for his work with squashes and pumpkins (pictured) by having a squash variety named after him?
 * HalfGig  talk  18:01, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Much better! You read my mind about the pic position. How about something that he named 4, and 1 was named after him? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:32, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * That's actually one species and one subspecies. What's confusing is that there are two indexes: GCI and IK--"The records in IPNI come from three sources: the Index Kewensis (IK), the Gray Card Index (GCI) and the Australian Plant Names Index (APNI)." This shows it's recognized by one or of the three reputable sources. How about:
 * ALT3 ... that botanist Thomas W. Whitaker named one plant species, one plant subspecies, and had a squash variety named after him for his work with squashes and pumpkins (pictured)? ....  HalfGig   talk  18:48, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * ALT2 is just smashing! Martinevans123 (talk) 19:30, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg ALT2, struck ALT 1 as still without a ref after the claim, while ALT3 is a bit too precise, but valid ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:10, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Moving to Special Occasions holding area for Thanksgiving Day per nominator request on WT:DYK. The image makes a great lead hook! Yoninah (talk) 10:22, 11 November 2014 (UTC)