- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 15:20, 19 November 2016 [1].
- Nominator(s): Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:10, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Another day another mushroom - this is another work for which I've gone through just about every available source so I suspect it's comprehensive, and I feel it's on par with other fungus FAs. Have at it. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 22:10, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Driveby comment: I'm very happy to see this here and I hope to offer a fuller review later, but: Gomphus bonarii currently redirects to this article, despite the fact it's described in the article as a separate species. Something needs to be done about that, I think. Josh Milburn (talk) 22:57, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Oops, forgot to remove that from the description section. That source mentioning it as a separate species is from 1987. With the overhaul and reexamination of Gomphus/Turbinellus the consensus is it is just part of this species. See here as index fungorum has updated but mycobank hasn't Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:31, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Ref 11: Lexicon: page no is missing
- added Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:51, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Ref 7: Earle - 373–451 [407]. Is 407 the only page cited?
- yep Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:51, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Ref 25: Petersen: 118 pages are cited. Can we narrow down the page range to relevant pages?
- having some trouble tracking down digital versions...gotta get back to the library... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:59, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Ref 30: Corner: 255 pages. Same as above
- Ref 32: Masui: 84 pages. Same as above
- Ref 35: Ammirati et al. Should the complete details be used? or combined with ref 23.--Redtigerxyz Talk 05:14, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I combined them. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:51, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Singora Let me leave one of your "virtual placeholders". I'll go over this in detail throughout the coming week. Singora (talk) 13:15, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- "Franklin Sumner Earle made C. floccosus the type species of the new genus Turbinellus in 1909, remarking that "They constitute a striking and well-marked genus which seems to have more in common with the club-shaped species of Craterellus than with the following genus where they have always been placed."" The They is ambiguous, here.
- I added more detail to clarify that Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:26, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- There's some inconsistency on the capitalisation of article names in the references, unless you are following some norm that has eluded me.
- yep, all title-cased now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's all that leapt out at me, but I had my say at GAC. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:28, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support; should have added this earlier. Sorry! Josh Milburn (talk) 21:53, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cas, just a few nitpicks Jimfbleak (talk) 14:48, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- shaggy-, scaly-, or woolly—I'm not convinced by the hyphens, since none of the names are actually hyphenated
- let me get some advice on that - I always used the dash/hyphen when a name chopped off, i.e. kelp- or southern black-backed gull... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:56, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- floccus, meaning "flock of wool"—I think that meaning of flock is close to obsolete now, perhaps "tuft" would be better for the youngsters?
- added...I feel so old... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:55, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- However—please check that each use is actually necessary
- trimmed one Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:55, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- by the indigenous words Tlapitzal, tlapitzananácatl or oyamelnanácatl in Tlaxcala.—this is only appropriate if you explain the relevance of these names to the mushroom, as you have done with the Nepalese and as is self-evident in the Spanish.
- found meanings and added to two, third is obvious then Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:20, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- their growth slower in the cold climate. This form is slower growing,—repetitive
- removed one Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:55, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- who eat it, but has been eaten—as above
- tweaked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:55, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- it increased tone of guinea pig smooth muscle of the small bowel—I've no idea if that is good or bad, what are the consequences for the (unlinked) guinea pig?
- the smooth muscle ain't in the guinea pig at this point. The source does not elaborate, but as a doctor I know this would cause increased peristalsis (cramps/abdo symptoms etc....) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:54, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- over double—more than double seems more natural
- tweaked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:55, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- What is not known is whether the populations of T. floccosus —probably needs something like "local" or "indigenous" to qualify your populations
- added "there" as local would have been repetitive.. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:55, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Good luck Jimfbleak (talk) 14:48, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm happy to leave the first point with you, since I might be wrong anyway, changed too support above Jimfbleak (talk) 06:12, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
From FunkMonk[edit]
- "described a specimen from Canada as Cantharellus canadensis from a manuscript by Johann Friedrich Klotzsch" What is meant by this? He named it from an earlier description? If so, the first "described" could maybe be changed to "named"... And then "based on a manuscript."
- done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:20, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- "These ridges are up to 4 mm high." No conversion?
- added now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:20, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- "ectomycorrhizal relationships" Explain?
- word added now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:26, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- "showed it increased tone" What is meant by tone?
- It means Muscle tone - linked now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:20, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The intro seems a bit short.
- I added a snentence - anything else you think should go in from body of text?
- Support - I think it looks fine now, not much to add to the intro anyway. FunkMonk (talk) 17:03, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
From Singora[edit]
Note to CasLiber and Coordinators. The King of Thailand has died. Things have changed a lot here over the last 24 hours. I'll do my review next week. Singora (talk) 15:53, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- ok no probs, RL stuff should always take precedence Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:48, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support on prose per my standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 17:14, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Just tweaked one thing as "decurrent" is meaningful. else good Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:54, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria[edit]
Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:01, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- thx Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 14:22, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Review by Singora[edit]
Singora (talk) 12:32, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- erks! missed this! on to it now... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:46, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Summary
- RE: "and may be found in coniferous woodlands". Could you not just say "grows" or "occurs"?
- done. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:46, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Good. Singora (talk) 13:41, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- RE: "Though mild-tasting, they generally cause gastrointestinal symptoms of nausea, vomiting and diarrhea when consumed". This seems to assume a correlation between taste and toxicity. Does such a relationship exist?
- not as such - I guess to me it was a natural contrastive that it tastes ok yet makes people feel sick (rather than tasting foul..as many inedible mushrooms do) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:46, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed. Your sentence looks normal and natural; I was just wondering if it's correct.Singora (talk) 13:41, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Taxonomy
- Would para 2 work better as a footnote? Kuntze's "revisionary program" wasn't accepted and his contributions seem irrelevant. Note: I thought para 3 was also unnecessary until I noticed the Turbinellus genus was recently resurrected.
I can see your point as it is somewhat circumstantial, yet I am not sure what I would make it a footnote of (i.e. after which sentence I'd put the link..) . nevermind, figured it out, how's that? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:49, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]- Yes, I see you've appended the note to the first sentence in the paragraph. Singora (talk) 13:41, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Description
- RE: "The stipe itself can be up to 15 cm". Is "itself" redundant?
- yeah. removed.. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:46, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay. Singora (talk) 13:41, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- RE: "The white flesh is fibrous and thick, though thins out in old specimens" -> "the white flesh is fibrous and thick in young specimens, but thins with age"
- done. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:46, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Good. Singora (talk) 13:41, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- R. H. Petersen isn't linked
- done. dunno how I missed that... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:01, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay. Singora (talk) 13:41, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Distribution and habitat
- Here you adopt a Euro-centric view: distribution in Asia starts in India and progresses east to Japan. In the summary you start with North Korea and head west to Pakistan.
- switched Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:56, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Toxicity
- This is an interesting section. I read and confirmed ref #20, ETHNOMYCOLOGICAL KNOWLEDGE AND NUTRITIONAL ANALYSIS OF SOME WILD EDIBLE MUSHROOMS OF SAGARMATHA NATIONAL PARK (SNP), NEPAL, a PDF file.
Support Everything is good and all points I raised have been answered / addressed. Singora (talk) 13:41, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support from Edwininlondon[edit]
With the caveat that I virtually know nothing of biology, I found this article clear and meeting all criteria. My only few niggles are with the references:
- Berkeley MJ, Curtis MA. needs a year
- Montoya, A. seems the only one with period after initial
- Khaund P, Joshi SR needs a location?
- all tweaked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:04, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I did a reference spot check: Giachini AJ, Castellano MA: ok. Khaund P, Joshi SR (2014): ok. Berkeley MJ (1839): ok. Edwininlondon (talk) 21:48, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- many thanks for the source review/spot check Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:04, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.