Talk:Mycology/Archive 1

Re-inserting link about history of mycology

I noticed that there was some concern with the link to “Mycological Marvels” I had added previously, so I am re-inserting it with the assurance that it is not spam. The information provided by the link is both well-researched and reputable, as it comes from Mann Library at Cornell University. The linked site gives an interesting historical perspective on the study of mycology and discusses a number of important historical texts on the subject, including detailed illustrations and prints of various fungi from these books.--MannLib (talk) 13:08, 19 August 2008 (UTC)MannLib

Emptyness

Wah, the history is so empty. Someone who knows about mycology..fill this in!

--96.49.205.11 (talk) 05:25, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Medicinal mushrooms?

Is it really appropriate to have a section on medicinal mushrooms, referenced with (some) primary sources, in an overview article about mycology? Will remove this unless there's a compelling reason not to. (WP:UNDUE WEIGHT) Sasata (talk) 05:06, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

           I would like it if you added the tools for Mycology in by May 10, 2010.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.99.230.119 (talk) 11:18, 9 May 2010 (UTC) 

Jerome Bock quotation

Is it really wise to use this as a block quotation since it is a historical view of fungi that is quite outdated? Save the historical quote for the smaller text so someone who is not taking their time to carefully read the article will not mistakenly give weight to an opinion no longer relevant to modern mycology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.22.153.155 (talk) 19:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mycology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090831052918/http://sci.cancerresearchuk.org/labs/med_mush/med_mush.html to http://sci.cancerresearchuk.org/labs/med_mush/med_mush.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080509061914/http://media.med.sc.edu/microbiology2007/ to http://media.med.sc.edu/microbiology2007/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:55, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mycology/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 19:19, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Comments

I'm sorry but this will have to be a quick-fail, seeing that you have not edited the article at all, do not appear to have consulted with other editors of the article (including, as it happens, myself, but never mind that), and have not ensured that the article is free from immediately obvious issues such as a "Citation needed" tag, other uncited material, and a somewhat muddled organisation with very short paragraphs in no obvious relation to each other.

However, if you wish to try again at at any time, feel free to signal your intention to proceed by editing the article to fix the issues mentioned above, and then resubmitting the article, and we can take things a step at a time. Be aware that it may take some hours of work to bring the article up to standard, and that this will certainly involve locating and citing suitable scholarly sources. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:35, 1 March 2022 (UTC)