Template:Did you know nominations/Rhinotocinclus collinsae

Rhinotocinclus collinsae

edit
5x expanded by Quetzal1964 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 13 past nominations.

Quetzal1964 (talk) 06:14, 25 May 2026 (UTC).

  • starting Review.--Kevmin § 14:59, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
    • @Quetzal1964: First note, in the opening sentence of the taxonomy section it states the species was first named Parotocinclus chromodontus, and then moved in 2022 to Rhinotocinclus collinsae, but there is no explanation for the change in specific epithet. Whats up with chromodontus?--Kevmin § 14:59, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
      • I'm not the nom, but I was looking through the DYK queue and this caught my eye. This is rather confusing, since Rhinotocinclus chromodontus exists and seems to be an accepted but quite separate species. According to Reis & Lehmann (2022), R. collinsae was first described as Parotocinclus collinsae in 1985, and the source supports that and cites Margeret Collins as the source of the specific epithet (p. 345). This article seems to be in error and have gotten its species mixed up. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 16:10, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
        • Thank you Kevmin and Cremastra you spotted an error. The species was originally named Parotocinclus collinsae, it was never part of P. chromodontus. I have corrected it now. I am sure you are already aware of this but if you see a binomial with the author's name in parentheses (or brackets as we call them) then that is a new combination, the basonym, or original name, has no brackets round the authors names. Quetzal1964 (talk) 17:10, 1 June 2026 (UTC)
@Quetzal1964: I suspected that this was a simple editing error in our article, but I wanted to rule out the not so unreasonable possibility of there being a jr homomym issue during the genera move that necessitated a new specific epithet being coined as well, an all to frequent situation I encounter in older paleobotany and paleontomology liturature when article drafting.
Do you have additional sources for the hook fact? The DYK promoting editors and prep makers have been very stringent with regard to WP:EXCEPTIONAL "first" and other superlative claims and they will heavily scrutinize this.--Kevmin § 15:21, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
@Kevmin: https://etyfish.org/name-of-the-week2015/#:~:text=Who%20was%20the%20first%20African%2DAmerican,overlooking%20one%20or%20more%20names. It is effectively the same source but the author gives more background, in fact he says it may be the only fish named after an African American (I am not American or African, so I understand that term to mean a United States citizen descended from Africans forcibly transported to the United States before the American Civil War). I am in contact with the author and have asked him if he has a citation confirming this.Quetzal1964 (talk) 16:07, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
@Quetzal1964: I dont doubt that the author is correct (or at least thinks they are), but this will be run though the gambit of demands for non-affiliated secondary sources to back up the claim. I would suggest pivoting slightly by removing the superlative and focusing on her being a civil-rights activist.--Kevmin § 16:37, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
@Kevmin: How about Alt1 "...that Rhinotocinclus collinsae was named after Margaret S. Collins, the African-American child prodigy, entomologist and civil rights activist, who was known as the "termite lady"?" Quetzal1964 (talk) 18:23, 2 June 2026 (UTC)
@Quetzal1964: Its very hooky and flows well, you will need to add prose for the "child prodigy" and "termite lady" to Rhinotocinclus collinsae.--Kevmin § 00:43, 4 June 2026 (UTC)
@Kevmin: Thank you. Done. Quetzal1964 (talk) 07:42, 4 June 2026 (UTC)
@Quetzal1964: I may be missing something, but the current Eschmeyer's page linked for the first half of the etymology and Margaret S. Collins ( here) at all, it validates the type locality and the genus change only. "child prodigy" also still needs a reference in the article as a whole, which could be used from ref one in the Margaret S. Collins article.--Kevmin § 16:56, 4 June 2026 (UTC)
  • Article expansion to over 1500 from stub is new enough and long enough. Article is well cited and neutrally written. No policy issues identified within the article. Alt1 Hook is cited and sourced to several references which is matches. Now looking good to go.--Kevmin § 17:09, 4 June 2026 (UTC)