Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chalciporus piperatus/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Ian Rose 10:03, 9 November 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Chalciporus piperatus

[edit]

Chalciporus piperatus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Sasata (talk · contribs) & Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:01, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sasata and I are nominating this for featured article because we feel we've tinkered with it to the point we're happy with it as far as we can tell and figure that any further tinkering can be done with a minimum of fuss and comfortably within the FAC time frame. I need to re-borrow one book when it is available (Rainforest Fungi of Tasmania) to get a page number and will be able to do so in the next 3-4 weeks. So have at it for everything else...cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:01, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Support Comments from Jim Usual polished work, just a few niggles before I support Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:58, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please stick to one variety of English spelling, I don't mind which (color/colour and an autumn at least)
britannicized britannicised Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 17:16, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • ectomycorrhizal,—daunting in the lead, can it be replaced (symbiosis) or glossed here?
  • binomial name—link
linked Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 17:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The fruit bodies... —this sentence changes from plural to singular as it loses its subject (sorry Cas)
singularised Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 17:42, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • One of the smaller boletes, the cap —A cap isn't a bolete, methinks
indeed...required some rejigging Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 17:42, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • thought to be ectomycorrhizal, C. piperatus has not been confirmed as ectomycorrhizal in —Easily avoided repetition
  • It has been used as a condiment in many countries —How is it used? Fresh, dried, powdered?
sources don't really clarify, just say "added in small amounts" ...so I presume it is either dried or just occasionally 1-2 mushrooms are cooked up along with a bunch of boletes. I am pretty sure it isn't powdered though. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:00, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I scraped my sources and added this, but agree in general that there isn't a whole lot written about this. Sasata (talk) 07:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yannai cited text is missing publisher, Fuhrer is missing a page number
added Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 17:36, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support (Delegates: I was the GA reviewer). Very strong- even the chemistry section is very readable! Great pictures and sources, well written, even quite an interesting species. If I'm being picky, the last line of the edibility distribution section is rather oddly constructed and the edibility section is a little choppy. J Milburn (talk) 22:01, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

yeah that sentence is a tricky one. The suspicion is that the clade is parasitic, so reworded. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 10:44, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Quadell

The article is well written. It's a bit of a snoozer for those of us not particularly interested in mushrooms, but that's not the article's fault; in fact, the prose (particularly in "Description") does an admirable job of making dry information as engaging as possible. I have a few relatively minor suggestions below. I have also made a few wording and grammar changes for smoothness. If you disagree with any of them, feel free to revert and discuss.

  • Semicolons have their place, but it can be distracting for the reader when two sentences in a row use them. The top of the "Description" section and the bottom of the "Distribution and habitat" section both do this.
  • Hyaline should be linked and parenthetically described ("translucent") the first time it is used, not the second.
  • This sentence could use a reword: "The basidia (spore-bearing cells) are narrowly club-shaped with many internal oil droplets, hyaline, four-spored, and measure 20–28 by 6–8 µm." At first it looks as if the sentence is saying that the basidia have internal oil droplets and hyaline, or that the oil droplets are hyaline. It's confusing to use "narrowly club-shaped with many internal oil droplets" as the first adjective-phrase in a list of adjectives. And the last list item isn't an adjective at all, but a verb, and so doesn't belong it the same listing. So I would reword like "The basidia (spore-bearing cells) measure 20–28 by 6–8 µm and are hyaline, four-spored, and narrowly club-shaped, with many internal oil droplets." (Although it might be smoother broken up into two sentences.)
  • The multiple "and"s are poetic in "in or near coniferous and beech and oak woodland", but perhaps too casual.
  • Is it correct to capitalize "West Coast" but not "eastern states"?
  • Our article capitalizes West Coast. As far as I know, there isn't a capitalized noun for the group of states in the eastern US. At any rate I've changed it to the equivalent Pacific Coast (in which the capitalization is more obvious). Sasata (talk) 17:31, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second paragraph of the "Distribution and habitat" section uses "has been recorded" in two sentences in a row.
  • Would it be accurate to explain ectomycorrhizal for the reader this way? "...thought to be ectomycorrhizal (symbiotic with plants, like most Boletaceae)..." If so, it would be helpful.
  • This clause contains an incorrect use of a comma: "The mushroom needs to be well-cooked before consumption, otherwise there is a risk of gastric symptoms". Perhaps this? "The mushroom should be well-cooked before consumption to minimize [or alleviate] the risk of gastric symptoms"
  • Should it be in the category of "edible fungi", given that the text describes controversy about the designation?
  • If left it in, as it has some history of being used as an edible mushroom. I'm not too concerned about the categorization of "edge" cases like this; I figure if Amanita muscaria is in this category, this mushroom can be as well! Thanks for your helpful comments Quadell. Sasata (talk) 17:31, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. All my concerns have been addressed. This article clearly meets all our FA criteria. – Quadell (talk) 18:20, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

  • FN38: Boletes of California is an online edition of California Mushrooms, but has different publisher and author information than the print version - is there a way to reflect this in the footnote? I see dates are reflected already. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:33, 29 October 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Chalciporus_piperatus/archive1&oldid=1138457264"