Talk:Geopyxis carbonaria/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 20:10, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to offer a review. Josh Milburn (talk) 20:10, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"The fungus has a temperate North Hemisphere distribution." I think Northern Hemisphere is more typical, but how about something like "The fungus is distributed throughout many temperate regions of the Northern Hemisphere."

Sure, changed. Sasata (talk) 19:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The prose in the taxonomy section is a little choppy- not bad, but perhaps you could try to smooth it out a little (also, you link "taxonomic" twice)

Copyedited this section. Sasata (talk) 19:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I trust this is something you'll be in a better position to know than me- does "trama" actually refer to the flesh of this species, or is the term specific to basidiocarps? Our article on trama seems to suggest the latter

That is correct, trama refers to the tramal plates (i.e. gills). Someday I (or someone) need to move trama (mycology) to context and make the article less basidiomycete-centric. Sasata (talk) 19:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"apothecium" is undefined jargon

Replaced with fruitbody. Sasata (talk) 19:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"which grows in similar habitats" Similar to what? The habitats you were just discussing of the habitats of Geopyxis carbonaria?

Fixed. Sasata (talk) 19:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What is "a moderate pathogen"?

Hopefully it's clear now. Sasata (talk) 19:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"The formation of a rudimentary Hartig net, characteristic of mycorrhizal fungi, suggesting that it might be capable of forming mutualistic relationships under the right conditions." This sentence doesn't quite work- you're missing a word or two

Fixed. Sasata (talk) 19:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"up to 700–100 fruitbodies" I assume this is a typo?

Yes, fixed. Sasata (talk) 19:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're missing a location on your Evenson source

Added. Sasata (talk) 19:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and images all seem appropriate. Shame we don't have an article/category for the burnt ground fungi. The lead seems a little short, but for such a simple species, that's probably not surprising. I couldn't actually find it in my better field guides (I didn't bother checking the poor ones!) so I'm guessing that it's pretty unusual in the UK; you don't specifically mention the UK in the article, so that's not an issue. Josh Milburn (talk) 20:54, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find much detailed distribution info, so the article reflects that. I fattened the lead a bit for good measure. We will soon have both an article and category for post-fire fungi! Thanks for reviewing, Sasata (talk) 19:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy with the changes and have no further issues, so I'm going to go ahead and promote. Nice work, as ever. Josh Milburn (talk) 22:18, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]