Talk:Hypericum foliosum/GA1

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

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 22:18, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Comments

 * Lead: "and was then placed into section Androsaemum" ... 2 centuries later: I suggest we split the sentence and drop the "then", given the distance in time.
 * Changed to "later"


 * "hydrocarbons; it also has significant concentrations" - suggest "hydrocarbons, and significant concentrations".
 * Done


 * "and antihypertensive." -> "and antihypertensive properties." There is a slight danger here that we are endorsing all these (supposed) properties as genuine but it's probably ok here.
 * Changed to "for ... purposes" to address that, I think that softens the chance of endorsement a little. If you have other verbiage suggestions, by all means


 * Description: text is pretty clear to those of us with a biology background; the links are certainly a good contribution to intelligibility, but a diagram would still be very useful for the general reader.
 * Added simple diagram from the Robson article, hopefully it's helpful


 * Similar species: "told apart from H. grandifolium because it has" -> "told apart from H. grandifolium by its".
 * Done


 * Chemistry: "pinene also sometimes made up" -> "pinene sometimes can make up".
 * Done


 * Taxonomy: Tree is too cramped, suggest increase the text size (to 100%, along with the line spacing), and the box width. "on a 2013 study": yes, but "on Meseguer et al 2013" would be more informative.
 * Let me know if that is better, not particularly knowledgeable with cladograms


 * Suggest you mention that the Androsaemum group is Old World, per Meseguer.
 * Done


 * Etymology: what's it doing down here? Top of the article would be better and more usual, or perhaps top of 'Taxonomy' I suppose if you really want to keep it out of sight.
 * Totally valid, moved up


 * Ecology: "aecia and telia": now these terms are genuinely obscure to all but mycologists, so please provide brief text glosses for them: if indeed they need to be mentioned here at all. Better really would be an image, and a brief mention of how damaging the rust fungus is, rather than the names of its various parts, i.e. "The rust fungus ... infects the plant, causing mild/moderate/serious damage to the leaves" (or whatever).
 * Done


 * Uses: "in similar ways to other species in the genus": maybe mention this is antidepressant (from Hypericin, etc); it's very well documented, unlike much herbal medicine: you probably should cite it specifically.
 * I haven't actually been able to find anything on hypericin in this guy, unusually. Maybe I just missed it, but antidepressant capabilities don't seem like this species' forte. That phrase was more to communicate that the authors found that locals said (paraphrasing obv), "yeah we use this plant to fix messed up medical stuff like all the other ones that look like it around here"
 * OK that's genuinely surprising. Evolution can lose almost anything (except the genetic code), I guess.


 * "It also has antioxidant properties that derive from its carotenoid and phenolic oils." would be better as "Its carotenoids and phenolic oils give it antioxidant properties."
 * Done

Images

 * The images are on Commons and appear to be suitably licensed.

Summary
thanks for another great review, let me know if there are any other fixes I can make! Fritzmann (message me) 04:39, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
 * All done, but if you feel like reviewing something, that'd be greatly appreciated. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:35, 15 January 2024 (UTC)