Talk:Aquilegia pancicii

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Aquilegia pancicii article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Plants Low‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Serbia Low‑importance

	Serbia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Serbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Did you know nomination

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that a Serbian columbine species may attract bees with its scent?

Source: Radulović, Niko; Dekic, Milan; Zlatković, Bojan; Dekić, S.; Dekić, Vidoslav; Palić, R. (October 2007). "A detailed analysis of volatile constituents of Aquilegia pancicii Degen, a Serbian steno-endemic species". Chemical Papers. 61 (5). doi:10.2478/s11696-007-0055-y.

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Clermont (novel)
Comment:

Created by Pbritti (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 79 past nominations.

Pbritti (talk) 02:36, 12 June 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Starting Review--Kevmin § 13:54, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Article long enough and new enough, though a bit sparse on some details (there is preferred habitat detail in Radulović et al), and the chemoanalysis should likely be more than just one short sentence. I worry that hte hook is too close to "boring" for the too boring editors to allow, as it boils down to "flower attracts bees with smell". Are there other possible hooks you can provide, such as the preference for north facing mountain slopes, the preferance for calcicole chasmophyte conditions, the essentail oil being mostly Fatty acids and Carotenoids, etc --Kevmin § 14:24, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Kevmin: I think I can rewrite it to be a little more compelling. Something has come up today in the real world that's commanding my attention, but please anticipate my QPQ and a revised hook tomorrow UTC. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:10, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kevmin and Pbritti, the same fact might be hookier if we just reword it a bit: ALT1: ... that a Serbian columbine species might be luring some animals with mixtures of molecular compounds? Surtsicna (talk) 07:35, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Surtsicna: That's a clever ALT—I like it! QPQ coming momentarily. ~ Pbritti (talk) 12:25, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think we may be able to get alt1 through, I like it. The article is new enough and long enough, well cited to reliable sources. The wording is neutral and there do not appear to be any policy issues. There are no identified close paraphrasing or copyvio issues. Just waiting on QPQ now.--Kev min § 16:23, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alt1 hook is good to go, article is compliant with DYK rules as already noted. QPQ now in progress in good faith.--Kev min § 16:29, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]