Talk:Gymnopilus maritimus/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Rcej (Robert) - talk 04:16, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Nice job... very nice! You've used that source very efficiently; even the convergent evolution stuff is clearly sorted out, which was something I sort of dreaded reviewing at first glance. Fine writing on your part! btw, From my watchlist 'eavesdropping', I see you had a qualm or two; but no need. You've fulfilled the 'available sources' criterion, plain and simple. So, basically, I have a question:

• The source doesn't mention edibility at all; as such should that be left out, or should edibility be mentioned in the article and mycomorph as being 'unknown'? I'm guessing the former, but go with you ;) Rcej (Robert) - talk 07:41, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I don't think it should be mentioned at all. The edibility is essentially irrelevant- it grows in one small area and has been observed once. It's simply not a question that anyone would have asked. Do you think it's a problem? If I included anything about the edibility, I'd be straying into OR grounds. If you noticed the conversation on Sasata's talk page, you'll probably also know I'm pondering a shot at FAC. This recent discussion seemed to come to the conclusion that, even if there were very few sources, if the article answered all the questions you'd want to know, it was eligible for FA status. What do you reckon? J Milburn (talk) 12:04, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

• Seriously, I'm going to pass it as is. Deservingly! Much success with FA :) Rcej (Robert) - talk 05:14, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Results of review

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

The article Gymnopilus maritimus 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