Talk:Cyathus striatus/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. I think it is a wonderful article, and very well describes this amazing fungus. My only reservations are that it has so many words unfamiliar to the general reader. But the diagrams and other attempts to explain do a good job, and I can not ask that the article be simplified. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 00:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 *  Final GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): Very well written b (MoS): No basic MoS errors
 * 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: NPOV
 * 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:
 * This is a fascinating article. Congratulations!
 * 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:
 * This is a fascinating article. Congratulations!
 * This is a fascinating article. Congratulations!
 * This is a fascinating article. Congratulations!

&mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 00:15, 28 April 2009 (UTC)