Talk:Ramalina peruviana

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ramalina peruviana/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 15:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I'll get to this in the next few days. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing. Ready for comments! Esculenta (talk) 16:55, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

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

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• I randomly googled three phrases and only turned up Wikipedia mirrors. Earwig's tool shows no sign of copyright violation.
• Spotchecks:
  • "Although present in New Zealand, it is relatively uncommon" is sourced to this source which supports the information
  • "The main distinguishing feature of R. peruviana is its predominantly lateral soralia, as opposed to the mostly apical soralia found in R. dendriscoides." is sourced to this source which supports the information
  • "In Australia, its grows exclusively corticously, and is most commonly found on the mangrove species Ceriops tagal and Rhizophora stylosa." is sourced to this source which supports the information.
• General -
  • Suggest adding conversions for the measurements (see <nowiki></nowiki)
    • Added them for the two non-tiny measurements in description. Esculenta (talk) 02:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
• Description:
  • link for "punctiform"?
    • Added. Esculenta (talk) 02:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Suggest "When present, the apothecia feature discs ranging" to make it clearer
    • Reworded for clarity. Esculenta (talk) 02:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
• Similar species:
  • link for "sekikaic acid"?
• Chemistry:
  • "The expected results for standard chemical" ... why "expected"?
    • Trimmed word. Esculenta (talk) 02:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Oh, here's the link for "sekikaic acid" .. it should be linked on first occurance
    • Done. Esculenta (talk) 02:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
  • "a secondary metabolite it was not known to produce in lichen form" ... surely it doesn't now produce this is lichen form?
    • I've reworded this so it doesn't sound like the chemical is in lichen form. Esculenta (talk) 02:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay - it's been a wild month here for weather and have had several small farm crises... frozen and leaking troughs are not fun in winter!

• No worries! I appreciate it whenever one of my GANs get reviewed. Esculenta (talk) 02:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:30, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

• These are the changes made in response to your suggestions. Esculenta (talk) 02:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

• Looks good - passing this now. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:33, 25 February 2024 (UTC)