Talk:Lepiota babruzalka

Latest comment: 12 years ago by Casliber in topic GA Review
Good articleLepiota babruzalka has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 6, 2012Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on October 1, 2012.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Lepiota mushroom species L. ananya, L. anupama, L. babruka, L. babruzalka, L. harithaka, L. nirupama, L. shveta, and L. zalkavritha all have names derived from Sanskrit?

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Lepiota babruzalka/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Right, I'll jot some queries as I go....Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

  • Anything at all can be added about infrageneric relationships? Big genus....
  • Unfortunately, the authors did not include any molecular work in their study, and did not discuss infrageneric relationships. Else Vellinga, in her "Nomenclatural Overview of Lepiotaceous Fungi (Agaricaceae) Version 4.8 (2010)" speculated that it might be in the "Leucoagaricus/Leucocoprinus clade", but even though she is a recognized authority on the genus, I didn't feel it warranted a mention here (I doubt she's seen the species in hand). Sasata (talk) 23:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply
  • There are alot of caps in the early sentences of the description section. Any way any can be folded in would be great...might not be possible but would be good if could be done....
  • There are alot of bamboo species - are there any more specific details of bamboo genera hosts etc.? No mention of soil type or flat/swampy/montane/hilly terrain etc.
  • No speculation on edibility at all....?

Other than that, a nice tight read....Casliber (talk · contribs) 15:01, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

Thanks much for reviewing! Sasata (talk) 23:35, 5 October 2012 (UTC)Reply

1. Well written?:

Prose quality:  
Manual of Style compliance:  

2. Factually accurate and verifiable?:

References to sources:  
Citations to reliable sources, where required:  
No original research:  

3. Broad in coverage?:

Major aspects:  
Focused:  

4. Reflects a neutral point of view?:

Fair representation without bias:  

5. Reasonably stable?

No edit wars, etc. (Vandalism does not count against GA):  

6. Illustrated by images, when possible and appropriate?:

Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:  
Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:  


Overall:

Pass or Fail:   - another concised and clinically executed fungus GA. Nice work. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:16, 6 October 2012 (UTC)Reply