Talk:Lactarius deterrimus/GA1

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

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 18:24, 11 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Will review soon. MathewTownsend (talk) 18:24, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * review
 * This is a highly specialized article. In reading through it I've made only on edit.. However, it's written in such a way to be accessible to the nonspecialist. Good job in covering its history, the description of the fungus and it's variants, its use as food etc. It's always interesting when a forgotten scientist comes to the fore and a species name reverted to the original!

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 20:22, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
 * b. complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
 * b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
 * c. no original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
 * fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * no edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass!
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * no edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass!
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass!
 * Wow, thanks! That was very fast O_O =). I also owe special thanks to the various copyeditors, especially Sasata, and others during its appearance on the main page. Regards.-- GoP T C N 20:40, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes and I saw Casliber too. I do tend to trust editors whose articles I've seen before and who in my book are experts on the subject! Great pictures, citations all in order, etc. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:30, 12 July 2012 (UTC)