Talk:Mycena californiensis/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Rcej (Robert) - talk 05:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Nice article! Here's everything:

• In section History and tax, the snippet "...calling it Agaricus (Mycena) californiensis." Does that mean the genus Agaricus became Mycena, or specifically that A. californiensis became M. californiensis?

• Also, sentence "Researching his 1982 monograph of Mycena, Maas Geesteranus examined the holotype material, but because of its deteriorated condition, he was unable to corroborate the distinguishing features proposed by Berkeley and Curtis, and he agreed with Smith's assessment of the species.", clarify "holotype material"; similarly, in sentence "He compared the isotype material (a duplicate of the holotype) with Californian specimen and the type of M. elegantula and found them to represent the same species,...", define isotype and/or clarify the duplicative relationship between isotype and holotype. Is it an artificially-inspired duplication?

• In Micro. chars., define "medullary". Rcej (Robert) - talk 05:30, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I think I have clarified all points above. To your satisfaction? Sasata (talk) 06:07, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Very good! Your noms are becoming popular... I missed the last two just by not snatching 'em quick enough ;D Rcej (Robert) - talk 07:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Someday in the not-too-distant future I'm gonna drop about two dozen GANs into the queue at once, so there will be more than enough fungus for everyone! Thanks for review again. Sasata (talk) 14:06, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Results of review

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

The article Mycena californiensis passes this review, and has been upgraded to good article status. The article is found by the reviewing editor to be deserving of good article status based on the following criteria:

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: Pass