Jump to content

Talk:Meinhard Michael Moser/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Sasata (talk · contribs) 18:58, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Claiming review. Will have comments up in the next couple of days. Sasata (talk) 18:58, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article looks pretty good to me already. Here are some initial thoughts, I may have more later. Sasata (talk) 04:51, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

lead links: reforestation, taxa

Done. Josh Milburn (talk) 20:59, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks so much- just noting that I have seen these comments and will get to them soon. Josh Milburn (talk) 17:45, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Sasata: Frustratingly, I seem to no longer have access to the Mycological Progress piece, which was one of my original main sources. Do you happen to have access? I'd appreciate a PDF, if so. Josh Milburn (talk) 17:33, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't have easy access to Springer journals anymore, but I'm sure you'd get it pretty quickly with a posting to WP:RX. Sasata (talk)
I've left a request. It's from that article that I got the information about his time as a "mushroom controller" that you requested above. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:10, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have you seen doi:10.1016/S1468-1641(10)60171-5? I can email this if you don't have access. Sasata (talk) 18:17, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Missing info: Moser was president of the Austrian Mycological Society, see doi:10.1016/S0269-915X(99)80035-4
  • have you considered writing to former colleague Irmgard Krisai-Greilhuber to see if she might have another photo for us to use? Sasata (talk) 19:28, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks- a good idea. I did send out some emails when I first wrote the article, though not one to Krisai-Greilhuber. I thought I might try another wave of emails this weekend- I thought the best move would be to temporarily remove the current image... Josh Milburn (talk) 19:10, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "but this was no longer necessary after changes in the rules of taxonomic nomenclature in 1981." -> suggest "but this was no longer necessary after changes to nomenclatural rules that took effect in 1981." Note the change in link target, as the first just redirected to taxonomy (biology) anyway.
  • "Some of his work ... became important in the literature." construction sounds a bit odd to my ears
  • I'm thinking that the word "mushroom" should appear somewhere in the lead, perhaps in the second sentence! Sasata (talk) 05:57, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I don't see any reason to hold this fine article back, as all of the good article criteria are met. Will leave the remaining couple of questions for you to ponder and perhaps address when you get that source. Hope to see this at FAC sometime! Sasata (talk) 19:49, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Josh Milburn (talk) 20:23, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]