Talk:Banksia lemanniana/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Hello! I find this article perfectly awesome, and am interested to review it. Still, I have the following comments about it:

• The lead is perfectly written. A few comments:

• I don't think you have mentioned the vernacular names elsewhere in the article. So please add reference for the names in the lead itself. The same applies to the synonym in the taxobox.

names added to body of text and referenced (Phillippa Nikulinsky is a reknowned artist and associate of WA botanists so a reliable source), synonym referenced now Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:59, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• I went through the Description section, but could not get what is unusual about the hanging of inflorescences as you say in the Lead. Could you add a line or two about it both in the Lead and Description?

added a bit - essentially almost all species send spikes upwards. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• on the south coast of Western Australia --> southern coast.

done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• Some details could still be covered - those of "Cultivation" and "Ecology" must be mentioned.

added a bit Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:23, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• In the taxobox, should not the binomial name be italicized (both in the heading as well as in the body of the taxobox)? Also, do you have the year for the synonym mentioned there?

ooops, fixed. year added for synonym Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• In the Description,

• I suggest the part about flowers (Flowering typically occurs between ... and 3 cm (1.2 in) wide.') could be separated into an individual paragraph, such that this section has three paragraphs. This looks neat and systematic to me then.

done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• In the line ...while the buds are an attractive chocolate brown in colour..., I think the word attractive may sound a bit biased on the part of the author. Perhaps you could use rich chocolate brown in its place?

done - note the bottom one I am happy as attractive as we're discussing its horticultural appeal there... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• The word crenulate may need a bit of simplification. I appreciate your efforts to simplify inevitable jargon elsewhere.

linked to Glossary of plant morphology#crenulate and explained Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• In the line One side, termed the outer surface, is dark brown and wrinkled and the other is black and and smooth, and has been repeated by mistake. Also, I think the "and" in ... wrinkled and the other ... should be replaced by "while".

changed to "while" Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• Just a bit of curiosity on my part, but why do the seeds sparkle? Could you manage to add a reason for this? (Not mandatory, just a suggestion for improvement.)

will add if I can source.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:23, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Obviously not compulsory, would be a nice detail to add. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 06:11, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• In the Taxonomy,

• It may not be mandatory to mention this, but one may be curious to know why the species was named after Charles Morgan Lemann. Could you add how he was related to this plant's taxonomic history?

this I don't know - he had no direct role in discovery or naming of it Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:11, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

OK, could do without this. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 06:11, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

• In the line ...with leaves and a habit so like B. Caleyii,... should not the "C" be in lower case, and be written as B. caleyii instead? Also, in the line He considered it closely related ... or pink-tinged inflorescences you mention a plant B. caleyi. Is it that the plants are the same and one name is misspelled?

In older writings, you'd often see species names that were named after people capitalised - we don't do this now. It is a direct quote from Drummond so left it as he said it. Yes they are the same. I have linked in both... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:04, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• What do you mean by "pollen-presenter characters"? The reader may not be able to understand this.

I mean characters of all three preceding plant bits - now bluelinked pollen-presenter so hopefully makes it clearer it is characters of all three things Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:04, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• Who is Pauline Ladiges? Please add whether she is a botanist or of any other such profession.

she is a professor of botany - I added "professor" but wondered whether to go into any extra detail.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I am myself unsure about this, still, it is not a major issue for GAN. Professor would do.

• In Distribution and habitat, in the line most of its population lying protected within Fitzgerald River National Park I don't think lying is suitable here. Perhaps just omitting it would do.

done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• In Ecology, though an understandable term, I consider it fine to link pollinator.

done Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:49, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• In Cultivation,

• I again feel that the word "showy" could be replaced by a word like "prominent".

hmm, I think what I meant was more like "attractive" - changed Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 08:59, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

In the sense you mean, we can allow this.

• Link alkaline.

Have linked to Soil pH - there is Alkali soil but this is wrong at present and needs to be overhauled. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:05, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

• I don't think you need to link the names of the authors in citations when you have already done so in the main text.

Hmmm, have done it in other articles...could say it was a different section. I haven't seen a specific ruling on this. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:25, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Obviously not mandatory. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 06:11, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

You have done great work at this article. After you have addressed the above comments, I would be more than pleased to pass this nice article as GA. Cheers, Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 07:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for your swift response. I believe all issues are fixed now, so I would pass this article as GA without any delay. Good luck with your future WikiWork and cheers!

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.