Talk:Pseudocolus fusiformis/GA1

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

Hi, I see that you added a bit about eatability, per my question about the relationship of Pseudocolus fusiformis to humans. I am assuming that you would have said more if there had been more to say, such as why it is not recommended for human consumption. In my previous reading, I found it to be a generally fine article. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 16:39, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * There is one point that is frustrating to me, as I know nothing about mushrooms, and I don't know if there is anything you can do about this. The article starts out: "Pseudocolus fusiformis is a stinkhorn mushroom in the Phallaceae family. It is the most widely distributed member of the genus Pseudocolus"
 * The trouble is that clicking on Phallaceae and Pseudocolus doesn't really provide any more information about what it means to be part of this family and genus. Perhaps this is one of the situations where more cannot be explained to the layperson.

&mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 16:52, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I added a little bit more about the non-edibility and reasons for it, mentioning that it was non-poisonous, and referring to other similar species. I agree that the genus and family pages you clicked need a lot more work, hopefully this will improve over time. The Stinkhorns are one of my favorite mushrooms groups to learn and write about, and I have hopes of someday making a featured topic with these articles. Until then, I added a tiny bit in the lede about the Phallaceae family, to just give the reader a hint that the family contains some unusual-looking species. Sasata (talk) 18:54, 14 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Very nice! &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 19:07, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): Clearly and concisely written b (MoS): Follows MoS
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): Well referenced b (citations to reliable sources): Sources are reliable  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): Covers major aspects 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:
 * Well done. 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:
 * Well done. Congratulations!
 * Well done. Congratulations!
 * Well done. Congratulations!

&mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 19:07, 14 May 2009 (UTC)