Talk:Astraeus hygrometricus/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Hi, I am reviewing this article for GA and I have just one question before I complete the review. Given that there is a possible confusion between North American and Asian versions, is this only relevant to the "Edibility" section? And should this be mentioned in the lede? &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 22:37, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a good point. I had written the parent taxon article Astraeus simultaneously, and included this info in that article but neglected to mention it in this one. Have now added another paragraph to the Taxonomy section, and mentioned in the lede. Sasata (talk) 23:18, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

Congratulations!
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): Well written b (MoS): Follows MoS
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): Well referenced  b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable  c (OR): No OR
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Covers major areas b (focused): Remains focused on topic
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias: Neutral
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.: Stable
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: Pass!
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: Pass!
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: Pass!

&mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 00:23, 9 July 2009 (UTC)