Talk:Coccomyces dentatus/GA1

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

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 11:44, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Review
{{hidden/FC|headerstyle=background:#ccf;|contentstyle=border:1px #ccf solid; padding:10px;|header=Resolved comments|content= -

Well-written

 * Prose comments
 * "Coccomyces dentatus is one of only two species are known with both a spermatial". I'd recomment changing "are known with" to "kown to have". "are known with" makes no grammatical sense to me.
 * "looaklike" I guess you meant "lookalike".

Factually accurate and verifiable

 * Reference comments
 * All sources are reliable from a first look and I shall assume good faith since I can only understand english, spanish and portuguese and hardly domain french and italian. Structure and formatting of references is up to standard, specifically high so no concerns here.

Broad in its coverage

 * Coverage comments
 * Very broad and specific. This article not only covers the main aspects but takes them into great and helpful detail.

Images

 * Copyright comments
 * File:2012-02-16 Coccomyces dentatus (J.C. Schmidt & Kunze) Sacc 199890.jpg — From Commons. Copyright verified. Rationale verified.
 * File:2012-02-16 Coccomyces dentatus (J.C. Schmidt & Kunze) Sacc 199894.jpg — From Commons. Copyright verified. Rationale verified.
 * File:2012-02-16 Coccomyces dentatus (J.C. Schmidt & Kunze) Sacc 199893.jpg — From Commons. Copyright verified. Rationale verified.

}}
 * Caption comments
 * Captions are good, if not creative :)


 * Thanks kindly for the review, Hahc21. I've fixed the prose issues you mentioned above. Anything else? Sasata (talk) 17:48, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Nothing else. Passing. Good work. — ΛΧΣ  21™  18:34, 27 October 2012 (UTC)