Talk:Amanita atkinsoniana/GA1

Latest comment: 14 years ago by Rcej in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Rcej (Robert) - talk 05:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Pretty little fungus! Just a nip and tuck, she's ready:

  • I see your sources on that are limited. Why did Locquin choose that? Was it moved officially to Armillaria, then reverted to Amanita?
There was nothing official, Locquin just published his opinion about this species' classification, an opinion which few agreed with. I found a good explanatory quote from Singer, but it seemed a little off-topic so I moved it to a footnote. Sasata (talk) 06:39, 14 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
  • In description, define 'pseudorrhiza' and clarify "The stem often roots into the soil beneath the bulb, which tapers to a point if no pseudorrhiza is present." I couldn't find a wikt or wiki, but I sorta guess what you're gettin' at ;) Rcej (Robert) - talk 05:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
Clarified. Thanks for reviewing! Sasata (talk) 06:39, 14 September 2010 (UTC)Reply

Results of review

edit
GA review (see here for criteria)

The article Amanita atkinsoniana passes this review, and has been promoted to good article status. The article is found by the reviewing editor to be deserving of good article status based on the following criteria:

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):   b (MoS):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:  
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail: Pass