Talk:Boletus abruptibulbus/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jimfbleak (talk · contribs) 08:39, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, I've had a read now, obviously pretty good, but some quibbles  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  09:03, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The lead seems a little short at just over three lines, even for a relatively small article. Nothing else worth mentioning there? Also, with so few words, should be able to avoid repeat of "known".
 * Added a couple of sentences, and removed a "known". Sasata (talk) 04:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The specific epithet abruptibulbus refers to the shape of the bulb at the base of the stem &mdash; what does the abrupti- part of the specific name mean?
 * Added. Sasata (talk) 04:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The cap margin is curved inward when young, but becomes curved downward when mature. &mdash; any way to avoid repeat of "curved"?
 * Now "bent". Sasata (talk) 04:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * a "pleasant" odor &mdash; not sure about the quote marks, is it pleasant or not?
 * Hmm, I tend to put words that are subjective opinions in quote marks, but I suppose it doesn't lose anything without. Sasata (talk) 04:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * The stem is solid (i.e., not hollow) &mdash; stating the obvious?
 * Not sure if it's quite that obvious: normally, the word means "firm" or "stable"; in mycological jargon it specifically means "a stem that is not hollow". Sasata (talk) 04:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * A dilute solution (12%) of ammonium hydroxide (NH4OH) &mdash; I'd much prefer ammonia (NH3) solution, since less than one percent of the dissolved ammonia is in the form you give, see the ammonium hydroxide article
 * I changed it to "A drop of dilute ammonia (as a 12% NH4OH solution) placed", as the source says "With 12% of aqueous solution of ammonia (NH4OH)", does this work? Sasata (talk) 04:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer it without the dubious formula, but no big deal  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  06:58, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * mounted in a dilute potassium hydroxide &mdash; can you mount something in a solution?
 * Sounds odd, but it's standard usage. I linked this to Microscope slide to clarify. Sasata (talk) 04:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * 5–7.2 µm, 7.2–9 µm &mdash; unless there is a reason why one end of the range is less accurate than the other, should be 5.0-7.2 and 7.2-9.0
 * The source gives them this way, but I suspect it's just poor copyediting on their part, as their ± errors are a minimum of 2 sig figs. Added zeros. Sasata (talk) 04:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * relatively unique &mdash; ???
 * Changed to "distinctive". Thanks for reviewing! Sasata (talk) 04:31, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, that was fairly painless GA review (see here for criteria)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 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: