Talk:Amanita australis/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Rcej (Robert) - talk 04:00, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Nice! I'm thinking this is our first fungus review of '11. A couple things:

• First of many, I hope :) Sasata (talk) 22:42, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

• Define the specific epithet australis... mate! ;)

• Done. Sasata (talk) 22:42, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

• From how it reads: Was Stevenson considering Limacella macrospora to be similar to A. australis, or an entirely new species (that coincidentally would be later considered a synonym)? Rcej (Robert) - talk 08:46, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

• From the description it seems like the specimen was slightly decomposed (slimy and sour-smelling), which led her to believe it was a Limacella (which is similar to Amanita, but slimy). Hope this is clear in the article now. Thanks Robert! Sasata (talk) 22:42, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

• Better :) But, clarify if the specimens she designated Limacella macrospora were from the same collection as A. australis; the ultimate finding of synonymy reads too coincidental if we don't understand that these came from the same geographical area and it was basically her observations that differentiated them. Rcej (Robert) - talk 05:35, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

• Gotcha ... added the site and date of the Limacella collection, and also a quote from Ridley explaining why he thought they were the same. Sasata (talk) 06:23, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

• 'Atta boy!! ;) Rcej (Robert) - talk 07:41, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Results of review

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

The article Amanita australis passes this review, and has been promoted to good article status. The article is found by the reviewing editor to be deserving of good article status based on the following criteria:

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: Pass