This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fungi, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fungi on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
I'll review this one later tonight. Not my usual area of work, but I'm trying to do my bit to help out the other WikiCup competitors in the final round with reviews. Miyagawa (talk) 12:22, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
That's very kind of you! Looking forward to your review. Sasata (talk) 16:12, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Ok, on to the review. I've had a read through already and I don't think there will be a great many points to raise.
Duplicate links: There was just the one, so I fixed it myself.
Taxonomy: Although it would end up with four linked words in a row (because of the double barrelled name), I'd link mycologist in the first line (only because I had to go look it up myself!).
Done. Sasata (talk) 19:16, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Description: More of a comment than anything - you mention that the edibility is unknown, yet the template on the right says inedible and you mention earlier in the first paragraph about the taste not being distinctive. I take it the template doesn't have an unknown option?
Actually it does ... fixed. Sasata (talk) 19:16, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
If M. purpureofusca is an indicator species of relect Caledonian Forest, a reference to it at that article would be an improvement and would help tie this article better into Wikipedia as a whole.--Wetman (talk) 16:57, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Done – thanks for the note. Sasata (talk) 17:14, 23 September 2013 (UTC)