Jump to content

Talk:Amanita ravenelii/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

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

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk) 00:30, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will review shortly. Just saving as per the new instructions... Feels like ages since I've reviewed one of yours- everyone else beats me there!

I was gonna use the template, but I don't think I need it...

  • "it grows solitary" Odd phrase- I normally use "solitarily"
  • "somewhat truncated to attenuated." Link?
  • It doesn't really make sense to describe the edibility as "unknown or inedible"- if it's unknown it's unknown, and if it's known to be inedible it's not unknown. I'd go with inedible- no source has explicitly called it unknown that you have cited.
  • Actually, the source I have cited for unknown edibility (Bessette et al., 2007) calls the edibility unknown. Some sources like to "play it safe" and define the edibility all questionable or little-known mushrooms "unsafe" or "not recommended" or "possibly poisonous" when in reality, the edibility is better described as "unknown". Here I present all options that I've found in the literature and the reader can make their own choice. Sasata (talk) 02:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah, I certainly appreciate that- it does raise the question of the category, though. Placing the page in the inedible category suggests a degree of certainty. I'm not gonna stall the promotion on that point, but it's something to consider. J Milburn (talk) 11:37, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "does not have the pale yellow to brownish-orange, large conical warts," That doesn't read that well- something up with the commas?
  • Why do you spell out "Amanita" in some specific names, but not others?
  • "It has also been reported growing north of Baja California.[12]" North of Baja California would be California, surely? Or do you mean " in the north of..."? If so, perhaps clarify it's in Mexico?
  • No word on which trees it likes beyond "mixed woodland"?
  • It's preferred growing style (solitary etc) is not actually mentioned in the article body, but is in the lead.

Not the most thrilling of mushrooms (although it does look pretty cool!) but a fine little article, no doubt about that. Sources and illustrations are great- I'd be more than happy to promote once these little niggles are looked into. J Milburn (talk) 00:50, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review and the excellent suggestions JM, the article has definitely improved. Sasata (talk) 02:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Promoted, thanks for the speedy reply. J Milburn (talk) 11:37, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]