Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Urtica ferox/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was withdrawn by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 05:35 17 July 2026 FACBot (talk) 11:05, 17 July 2026 (UTC).
Urtica ferox
- Nominator(s): Alexeyevitch(talk) 03:55, 16 July 2026 (UTC)
This article is about a poisonous nettle found in New Zealand. Although most people are familiar with nettles, this species is particularly dangerous and people should be cautious of it. It has been a pleasure to see the article progress from a somewhat bare-bones article to what it is now. I'm thankful to User:Metalicat for his comprehensive GAN review of this article. Been a year since I nominated at FAC, but am glad to be back. Cheers! Alexeyevitch(talk) 03:55, 16 July 2026 (UTC)
Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:23, 16 July 2026 (UTC)
RoySmith
Sadly, I'm going to have to oppose this nomination on the basis of WP:FACR 1a ("prose is engaging and of a professional standard"). This suffers from a choppy writing style (see this at University of Toronto or this at Perdue for more on choppiness). I feel especially bad about having to say this because you followed our standard advice and listed your article at Peer Review and unfortunately nobody picked it up. Let me suggest two things for the next time you bring an article to Peer Review. First, be more patient. Don't just list something for two weeks and then close it. Second, if your intent is to get a pre-FAC review, link your request into {{FAC peer review sidebar}}. Doing so gives it greater visibility among people who haunt FAC and can give you the best reviews. I see you did that with Prumnopitys taxifolia previously, and got a good review out of it. This type of problem is a common issue when trying to get from GA to FA, so a FAC-specific review is really important. Also, if you don't attract any reviews after a month or so, don't by shy about dropping a note on WT:FAC asking somebody to take a look.
Since we're here, let me see if I can give you some productive advice. The way I usually describe choppy writing is that there's no flow, i.e. sentences don't logically build on each other. One of the tests I generally apply is whether the sentences could be rearranged in random order and still make sense. For example, I took this paragraph:and randomized the order of the sentences to yield:Flowering occurs from November to March. Pollen grains are collected by the densely packed stigmas on the flowers. The fruits are achenes that mature in January, each containing a single seed, 1.5 millimetres (0.059 in) long, that takes about one month to germinate.[7][1][8] The flowers are produced in panicles, which can reach 8 cm (3.1 in) long.[6][2] Burrows (1996) found that U. ferox is capable of building up large seed banks in the soil which may survive for several years, like European species in the genus Urtica which also show seed bank dormancy.[9] U. ferox has a diploid chromosome count of 48.[1]
There's no place where the reader is caught up short because a sentence appears to be referring to something earlier but that earlier thing isn't there. What you want to do is, rather than just present a series of facts, is to build a coherent story. This usually means you have some sentence that introduces a topic and then one or more sentences that come after it which expand on that topic in some way. A good example of where you already do this is in the previous paragraph:U. ferox has a diploid chromosome count of 48. The flowers are produced in panicles, which can reach 8 cm (3.1 in) long. Flowering occurs from November to March. Pollen grains are collected by the densely packed stigmas on the flowers. The fruits are achenes that mature in January, each containing a single seed, 1.5 millimetres (0.059 in) long, that takes about one month to germinate. Burrows (1996) found that U. ferox is capable of building up large seed banks in the soil which may survive for several years, like European species in the genus Urtica which also show seed bank dormancy.
The second sentence I quoted (starting with "These spines ..." refers back to the idea that you introduced in the previous sentence, and thus ties the two sentences together. Likewise with... The pale green leaves are thin and membranous, and the surface of the leaves, stems and stalks are covered in stiff trichomes (stinging hairs) that can grow up to 6 mm (0.24 in) long. These spines are prominent along the salient mid-vein and leaf margin...
The first sentence tells us that G-V et all built a phylogenetic tree. The next sentence expands on that, telling the reader what conclusions they came to based on that tree. It keeps the reader's attention moving along to follow the story. Another good example is... Grosse‐Veldmann et al. (2016) constructed a phylogenetic tree of the genus Urtica based on gender characteristics and genetic sequencing.[15] They found that the South African species U. lobulata is the sister species to U. ferox.[16][14] ...
The first sentence talks about the binomial name. The next sentence digs into more detail about the name. Actually, the rest of that paragraph follows much the same pattern, talking about the origins and meanings of the name in various ways. This is a great paragraph. You just need a lot more of thse. RoySmith (talk) 23:16, 16 July 2026 (UTC)... The etymology of the genus name Urtica is derived from the Latin word for stinging nettles, which comes from urere, meaning 'to burn'. The specific epithet ferox means 'ferocious', 'savage', or 'wild'.[18][19] ...
- Thanks for your thoughtful comments. I guess I'll move on to the PR, and hopefully be back at FAC in a month or two? Still feel pity about the previous PR not recieving any attention, but I'll follow your advice and hopefully come back more prepared. Alexeyevitch(talk) 04:47, 17 July 2026 (UTC)
Nominator's note
@FAC coordinators: I am requesting to withdraw this nomination. Thanks. Alexeyevitch(talk) 04:47, 17 July 2026 (UTC)
- Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 05:35, 17 July 2026 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.