Talk:Lactarius repraesentaneus/GA1

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

Reviewer: Rcej (Robert) - talk 05:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Cool name... say it real fast three times in a row! A few things:


 * Mention antibiotic property in the lead.
 * Done. Sasata (talk) 22:06, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * In Taxonomy; sentence "The variety Lactarius scrobiculatus var. repraesentaneus, proposed by Killermann in 1933, is considered a synonym."
 * Is it uncommon for an established variety of one species to also be recognized as a stand-alone species? Maybe elaborate :)
 * I would like to elaborate, but have no further information on this other than the fact that it's listed as a synonym at MycoBank. However, I fit in mention of Rolf's Singer's subspecies speciosus, for which I was able to find a link to the original pub. Sasata (talk) 22:06, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Very satisfactory! Rcej (Robert) - talk 03:51, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * In Descr., define "scrobiculate". There's no Wiki/Wikt, nor Webster on it!
 * Done. Sasata (talk) 22:06, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Smarty pants ;) Rcej (Robert) - talk 03:51, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Also, re its poisonous, mention that the gastrointestinal irritants/mechanism of action hasn't been identifed. Rcej (Robert) - talk 05:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Also done. Sasata (talk) 22:06, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Good job! I'ma pass him! Rcej (Robert) - talk 03:51, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Results of review

 * GA review (see here for criteria)

The article Lactarius repraesentaneus passes this review, and has been upgraded to good article status. The article is found by the reviewing editor to be deserving of good article status based on the following 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:
 * 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail: