Talk:Lactarius subdulcis/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I think the article is mostly there in terms of meeting the GA criteria. It's very well-written and well-cited. It appears to be mostly complete. Images are tagged with appropriate copyright tags, and there doesn't appear to be any major stability or WP:NPOV issues.
The only issue I see is with the lead section. It's very short, and doesn't really do a good job summarizing the article. If you can expand it and clean it up a bit, I think we've got GA-quality material here. I'll put it on hold for now. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:53, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- I've expanded the lead a little and fixed a typo in the prose- is that better? J Milburn (talk) 23:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- Article passed. Dr. Cash (talk) 23:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)