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.
... that Hypericum foliosum "shines" because of carotenoid compounds? Source: Rainha, Nuno; Lima, Elisabete; Baptista, José; Rodrigues, Carolina (2011). "Antioxidant properties, total phenolic, total carotenoid and chlorophyll content of anatomical parts of Hypericum foliosum". Journal of Medicinal Plants Research, page 1933. Aiton, William; Bauer, Franz Andreas; Sowerby, James; Ehret, Georg Dionysius; Nicol, George (1789). Hortus Kewensis, or, A catalogue of the plants cultivated in the Royal Botanic Garden at Kew. Vol. 3. London, page 104.
Hook fact does not appear in article text. Gatoclass (talk) 19:24, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
@Gatoclass: how is ALT1: "... that the shining St John's wort owes its bright colors to carotenoid compounds?" Both the common name and the claim that carotenoids contribute to bright colors are in the text. Fritzmann (message me) 20:43, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
That reads like a bit of an overstatement to me. I think if the word "partly" was added after "colors" it would probably work. Gatoclass (talk) 15:23, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
That looks fine now, thanks Fritzmann, however, because the source is offline, I will have to ask you to put a cite directly behind the relevant sentence in the article - thanks. Gatoclass (talk) 09:22, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
@Gatoclass: the Rainha et al. citation is already present at the previous sentence and following one. Certainly an identical citation is not required three times in one paragraph? Fritzmann (message me) 19:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith
Interesting:
QPQ: Done.
Overall: Fritzmann2002, the DYK rules specify that the cite must come at the end of the sentence in which the hook fact appears. Normally, I don't worry about this if the hook fact can be readily verified online, but for an offline source, it is generally necessary because otherwise we can get complaints when the nom goes to the main page. I have therefore added the additional cite, but you are perfectly welcome to remove it after the article has appeared if you prefer. Gatoclass (talk) 14:35, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Fritzmann2002, the DYK rules specify that the cite must come at the end of the sentence in which the hook fact appears. Normally, I don't worry about this if the hook fact can be readily verified online, but for an offline source, it is generally necessary because otherwise we can get complaints when the nom goes to the main page. I have therefore added the additional cite, but you are perfectly welcome to remove it after the article has appeared if you prefer. Gatoclass (talk) 14:35, 24 January 2024 (UTC)