Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Boletus luridus/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by GrahamColm 10:02, 9 May 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Boletus luridus

Featured article candidates/Boletus luridus/archive1

Nominator(s): Casliber (talk · contribs) & Sasata (talk · contribs) 07:12, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sasata and I have buffed this mushroom to the point where we think it is FA-quality or very near. Four eyes are better than two so hopefully we've found most issues already. Anyway, let us know about others and have at it. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:12, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

NB: A wikicup nomination.

Support~~Comments~~ Copyediting now, looks very good. Simon Burchell (talk) 10:07, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~The description mentions "tubes"; whereas most of the parts of the fungus are wikilinked, this isn't. Is there an appropriate target?~~

I've linked to Hymenophore for the time being. realistically there'd be something like Lamella (mycology)...or maybe Lamella (mycology) should be merged into hymenophore, which should be expanded whatever we do (a 5x DYK I can sense....) Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:56, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2-3 pores per millimeter has no imperial equivalent, whereas everything else does. For the sake of consistency I think some workable imperial measure should be put in, even if it is "per eighth of an inch" or something similar. Although I think it is fair to give up on the imperial equivalents once you start talking about micrometres...

We generally don't include conversions for measurements than are about less then half a centimeter, as it often difficult to get the sig fig input to consistently match the output. For example, a measurement range of 6–7 millimeters (1 sig fig input) translates to an actual value of 0.24–0.28 in, but at the desired 1 sig fig output, becomes 0.2–0.3, introducing a significant rounding error. The closest reasonable fractional equivalent would be 3/64ths of an inch, but even that introduces some conversion error (=1.19 mm). Sasata (talk) 16:32, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

cystidia are dark brown in Melzer's wasn't immediately clear to me and left me thinking "Melzer's what?" - perhaps use the full "Melzer's reagent"?

Done. Sasata (talk) 16:32, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~I've redlinked 4-keto-α-carotene but wouldn't know if an appropriate target exists.~~

I'm not sure if this derivative of alpha-carotene is noteworthy enough to deserve its own article, but I'll investigate to make sure. Sasata (talk) 16:32, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Very interesting article, particularly the mycorrhizal association with trees. I expect to support once the above quibbles have been dealt with. Simon Burchell (talk) 10:29, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Jim Very little I could see to fault, just a couple of observations Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

and will likely be fragmented — AE usage?

Changed likely to probably. Sasata (talk) 16:57, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The predilection of insects for this mushroom — Does the fungus gain anything from this, such as nutrients from excreta and rotting insect corpses?

Not in this case. There are some carnivorous fungi, but this isn't one of them. The human gets the benefit of extra protein when they eat the mushroom :-) Thanks for your support. Sasata (talk) 16:57, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This is a WikiCup nomination. The following nominators are WikiCup participants: Casliber. To the nominator: if you do not intend to submit this article at the WikiCup, feel free to remove this notice. UcuchaBot (talk) 00:01, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image check - all OK (PD-old-100, Mushroom Observer CC 3.0), sources and authors provided. GermanJoe (talk) 09:28, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Prose is wonderful.

Comments

are oval to somewhat fuse-shaped - Worded awkwardly. Just oval might be fine.

I've linked it to Fusiform as the source uses "subfusiform" which carries an idea of (I guess) lozenge-shaped. I agree balancing accuracy and smooth english can be challenging at times... Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:52, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

North America, it can be confused with the poisonous B. pulcherrimus, though this species has a fatter stalk and deeper red pores.[42] - Assume this refers to B. luridis. Not sure though.

this refers to pulcherrimus - clarified Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:50, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

B. luridus may occur in parks near a single tree, though it will not be found in acidic soils.[31] - is not found

Using the present tense "is" looks a bit odd after using a subjunctive construction "may" ...... Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources check out; they are consistent in format and are reliable. Source 38 is a little bizarre, citing information from across two different groups of pages, but I suppose there's nothing wrong with it. ceranthor 23:25, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, but might be cumbersome using individual page inlines unless we're using a lot of pages.... Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Graham Colm (talk) 20:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.