Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Gyromitra esculenta

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 User:SandyGeorgia 00:49, 15 July 2008 [1].

Gyromitra esculenta edit

Nominator(s): Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs)


I'm nominating this article for featured article because I believe it is comprehensive, almost exhaustively so, the images are all correctly copyrighted, and the prose has been copyedited by several people and is succinct/concise and treads a line between technicality and losing meaning. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:57, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "(2½ in)" → "(2.5 in)" (throughout article) (I think I got them all)
  • I believe quotes should use double quotes (again, several times in the article) (I think I got them all) Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gary King (talk) 05:42, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Otherwise sources look good and links checked out with the link checking tool. I wasn't able to evaluate the reliablitiy of the non-english sources Ealdgyth - Talk 12:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
MushroomExpert has been used on several other Mushroom FAs. It's managed by a published author and speaker. The Turkish Journal of Botany link is not dead; direct linking to the PDF is not allowed even though the article are free to access. I tried replacing it with a link to the abstract. Circeus (talk) 16:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, on mushroom expert though, we need some idea of how reliable it is. To determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The site is overseen by the main site-owner and contributor who I presume vets all contributions. This is tricky as mycology is somewhat obscure but I will see what I can find. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:35, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Given the extremely contentious nature of mushrooms (snickers), I'm pretty sure that if you can show that the guy who puts out the web page has managed to have something published in a third-party press on mushrooms, that'll go a long ways towards showing reliability. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:23, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He has two books published and available on amazon - [2]. I will have a look for some other 3rd party comments. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:19, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Guettarda

Looks good. A few quibbles

  • Second para - "It may be sold fresh in Finland..." seems to suggest that it cannot be sold fresh elsewhere. Is this the case? (yes, the article mentions a ban in Germany, Spain, and all english guidebooks strongly advise against eating it. I have no idea about eastern Europe WRT commercial sales to individuals as such, but Finland does stand out in its consumption of this fungus)
  • Taxonomy and naming, second para - why are English common names italicised? This seems odd. (Italics are used for emphasis of a word when it is stated. I concede it is confusing as scientific names and foreign words lose their marking feature. I'll ask Tony on that one)
  • Fourth para, second sentence: "most closely related to the genus Discina, and also Pseudorhizina, Hydnotrya" - is a word missing here? (I reworded to clarify)
  • Description, first para, fourth sentence: "Specimens from California may often have more reddish-brown caps" - it would read better if you picked either "may" or "often" (done)
  • Eighth sentence: "...with transparent spores elliptical and 17–22 μm in length"; perhaps "that are" between "elliptical" and "transparent"? (done)
  • Second para: "G. esculenta is somewhat similar in appearance..." "somewhat" is unnecessary, especially given the clarification later in the sentence. (reworded)
  • Distribution and habitat, third sentence: "The hunting period..." Is "hunting" really the commonly used term here? (I've seen morel hunting and truffle hunting written quite a bit actually, maybe its something about ascomycetes...)
  • Same sentence: "...and it may even appear"; "it" is ambiguous here, since (I assume) you're actually talking about the mushroom and not the hunting period. (done)
  • Fourth/Fifth sentences: "It can be common in some years.... The mushroom is more commonly found" - this would read better if the word "common" wasn't repeated like this. (abundant )
  • Sixth sentence: "Enthusiasts in Finland have been reported burying newspaper..." - tense disagreement (past/present) (I wrote it as "have been reported" (perfect passive - i.e. has happened and could keep happening) followed by 2 present active partiples and a past passive one 'inoclulated'. Erm, do you want me to change the participles?)
  • Second para, first sentence: "...is found widely across the continent,[6] as well as...Mexico". Mexico is part of "the continent". (ok, fixed)
  • Third sentence: "...and more montane areas than lowlands". "More in montane areas", perhaps? (done)
  • Fourth sentence: Why are Northern Ireland and Turkey lumped together? (trying to highlight either end of europe that they have been recorded)
  • Toxicity, first sentence: toxic reactions in general?;) (clarified)
  • Second sentence: "or misidentification" seems out of place. Maybe something more along the lines of "The wide range of of effects seen led experts to speculate whether reported toxicity was caused either by an allergic reaction, or misattributed due to confusion with another mushroom". (yeah. done)
  • Third sentence: has an unencyclopaedic tone. (The whole para could use reworking.) (changed to 'become severely ill or perish' - I liked 'perish' here)
  • Second para, second sentence: "at the time" is implied; if retained, it would read better if it was moved further down in the sentence. (yep. removed)
  • Third sentence: "and there had not been a fatality reported" - what about "and no fatalities were reported"? ("There had not been" is a little clunky). (got it) (trimmed and reworded a bit)
  • The first para talks about poisoning. The second para introduces gyromitrin, then goes back to poisoning. Then the third para goes back to gyromitrin. It might read better if the name is introduced in the third para, instead of at the start of the second. (done. should have seen that one)
  • Third para, third sentence: "However" isn't necessary. (removed)
  • Fourth sentence: "unclear whether...or that..." Whether and that don't match here. (change to 'to')
  • Geographical variation, third sentence: "However" is unnecessary given the second half of the sentence. I would recommend ditching "however" and replacing "although" with "but". (removed however, don't think it needs a but though)
  • Symptoms: Para 1 is a little jargony - "more severe poisoning may present". Para 2 has a lot of big words - they are linked, but even I don't know what "mydriasis" is. The "Treatment" section could also be translated into natural English. (trying here. Tricky but making a little progress)
  • Carcinogenicity: refs 56-59 don't appear to the used elsewhere in the article. Couldn't they be combined into a single link?
  • Fourth sentence: ...it is possible there is a...risk" - needs a word like "that" in there. (added)
  • Fifth sentence: "It is not known if the toxins can be completely removed by parboiling" seems a bit out of place here. (it means potential carcinogens here, clarifyed)
  • Consumption, tenth sentence: "False morels are also sold prepared and canned, in which case they are ready to be used" - this would appear to contradict the toxicity information elsewhere in the para (and is uncited). (it comes from ref 69 as well, and it means they have been boiled as per the preceding process before being packaged for sale. Would merely adding a 'fully' help or should it be elaborated more?) --> ('False morels are also sold canned after being adequately prepared')?
  • Sentence 13 - "As well as Europe, Gyromitra esculenta is consumed in the Great Lakes region..." Shouldn't start the sentence with "as well as Europe" (and if you did, it would need the word "in"). (Changed to 'Outside of Europe' as a natural link, or do you think it can disappear altogether?)
  • Prospects for cultivation, second sentence: is this supported by ref 78? (ref 79 did, but I tweaked it to show how)
  • Third sentence: "Furthermore, the fungus has been successfully grown to fruiting in culture" - "in culture" isn't clear. "In cultivation" or "in culture media"? (media it is)
Guettarda (talk) 21:16, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Guettarda (talk) 14:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. nice to open the scoring on this one. Do you mind if I strike the above or put it in one of those collapsible box thingies or something? Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:31, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Guettarda (talk) 15:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support. (COI declaration: I helped Cas a little bit to write the toxicology section) I believe it meets all the criteria, is well written, and all the medical info is up to date.Mr Bungle | talk 23:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support and comments ::fungi known as "False morels", and later (Snow morel) - query capitals (gosh, thought I had them all. gone)

It is also common in Central Europe and less commonly in the east, - is this grammatical? (commonly --> abundant)
As well as Europe, Gyromitra esculenta is consumed in the Great Lakes region and some western states in the United States. - I know Americans are hearty eaters, but doubt if they could swallow even a small continent. jimfbleak (talk) 13:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC) (changed first bit to 'Outside of Europe')[reply]
  • Reviewing only image licensing: looks good. --NE2 12:57, 14 July 2008 (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/Gyromitra_esculenta&oldid=1142602823"