Template:Did you know nominations/Boletinellus merulioides

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by PumpkinSky talk 23:40, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Boletinellus merulioides, Boletus carminiporus, Boletus illudens, Boletus miniato-olivaceus, Boletus projectellus, Boletus rubripes, Boletus subvelutipes, Phylloporus leucomycelinus, Phylloporus rhodoxanthus, Pulveroboletus ravenelii, Suillus cothurnatus

( Back to T:TDYK )

( Article history links:

• Boletinellus merulioides
• Boletus carminiporus
• Boletus illudens
• Boletus miniato-olivaceus
• Boletus projectellus
• Boletus rubripes
• Boletus subvelutipes
• Phylloporus leucomycelinus

)

Phylloporus rhodoxanthus • Pulveroboletus ravenelii • Suillus cothurnatus

• ... that the bolete mushrooms B. illudens, B. carminiporus (pictured), B. miniato-olivaceus, B. projectellus, B. rubripes, B. subvelutipes, Boletinellus merulioides, Phylloporus leucomycelinus, P. rhodoxanthus, Pulveroboletus ravenelii, and Suillus cothurnatus can be used to make dyes?

• Reviewed: Matt Hughes (fighter); Orkla Mining Company; Shovelnose Salamander, Blackbelly Salamander; Pre-Tolstojan; Russian ironclad Petropavlovsk; Gaston Hamelin; Operation Barras; First & Main; Eltanin Impact; Pseudogarypus synchrotron
• Comment: For some reason, only the first 8 articles show up in the nomination title and article history links (perhaps that's the template max?)

Created/expanded by Sasata (talk). Self nom at 07:23, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's the template max. I manually inserted the three additional articles into the section heading and added article history links and DYKmakes. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 00:46, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

• Hook fact good, present and referenced in all articles. Hook length acceptable per multi-nomination guidelines. New articles long enough, expanded articles meet 5x requirements. No policy issues found, and references are good with offline references taken AGF. Looks good, with a lot of effort taken! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevmin (talk • contribs) 21:22, 18 October 2012 (UTC)