Talk:Psilocybe hoogshagenii/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 17:43, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just claiming this one now. Great to see some more Psilocybe species! Review to follow later. J Milburn (talk) 17:43, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Psilocybe specialist Gastón Guzmán suggests that P. zapotecorum as described by Rolf Singer in 1958,[5] agrees well with the type of P. hoogshagenii.[1]" Comma splice. Perhaps add a comma after "zapotecorum", or remove the one after "1958". However, why do you choose not to list this as a synonym? If you're not convinced that it is, add a link? (Also, it's perhaps worth tying this sentence with the one prior to it).

Added a link and a comma. I didn't list this in the taxobox synonymy because it's only the P. zapotecorum as described by (sensu) Singer in the 1958 publication that is actually P. hoogshagenii – not really a synonym, but more a misidentification. zapotecorum is otherwise a valid species (I'm planning to expand this one as well). Sasata (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Much clearer now. J Milburn (talk) 20:05, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Be aware of semicolons. I don't mind them, I use them a lot, but I know some people find that they break the flow when overused.

I removed a couple. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The flesh in the cap is whitish, but more yellow in the stem. Both the odor and taste of the mushroom are farinaceous (similar to freshly ground flour). All parts of the fruit body bruise blue when handled or injured." Three short sentences in a row

Extended the last one. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"rhomboid" A little jargony. If you hope to take this to FAC, I'd say that the description section is a tiny bit too jargony generally- certainly not to the extent that it would affect a GA nomination, though.

Added a wikt link for rhomboid and ellipsoid. Will try to soften further if I decide to take to FAC. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hidalgo is dablink

Fixed. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"The mushroom are primarily used"

Fixed. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Paul Stamets, in his Psilocybe Mushrooms of the World, rates the psychoactive potency of the mushroom as "moderately active", and reports psilocybin levels of 0.6% (milligrams per gram of dried mushroom), and psilocin of 0.1%.[15] Chemical analysis of specimens from Brazil yielded up to 0.3% psilocybin and 0.3% psilocin.[16]" How does this compare with other mushrooms?

Added values from a couple of common species for comparison. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Allen JW. (1997). Teonanácatl: Ancient and Contemporary Shamanic Mushroom Names of Mesoamerica and Other Regions of the World. Ethnomycological Journals. 3. Seattle, Washington: Psilly Publications. p. 6." How sure are we this is reliable? The citation has thrown me a little.

While it is a WP:SPS, I think John Allen meets the criteria for "expert": he is widely published in the area, and has authored or co-authored a few psilocybin mushroom species. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair. If you're citing this as a journal entry, italicise the journal name? That's one of the things that threw me. J Milburn (talk) 20:05, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's a journal series, which if I understand correctly, should be formatted with cite book, and the series title given in the series parameter (at least, this is how I've done similar on several FAs). Sasata (talk) 20:42, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I note that this species doesn't actually appear on the navbox.

Added. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I love the images, they really add to the article, which is very strong. Interesting species; the anthropological element really makes it that bit more significant. J Milburn (talk) 22:44, 27 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review JM. I will attend to these in the next day or two. Sasata (talk) 14:40, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Rockefeller is, once again, to be thanked for the pictures. He indicated that he will soon be returning to the part of Mexico where these are found and will try to get some shots of the mushrooms in their natural habitat. Sasata (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, aside from the odd formatting on that one citation, I'm happy that this has shaped up nicely- either way, I'm happy to promote at this time. Great work, as ever! J Milburn (talk) 20:05, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Sasata (talk) 20:42, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]