Talk:Trichia decipiens/GA1

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

Reviewer: Choess (talk · contribs) 23:39, 12 October 2012 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * It appears that the article was initially written in German using an English source (Farr), and then translated into English here. This has resulted in some mangling of the technical language used to describe the morphology of the slime mold. I have tried to make some fixes, but while I have some knowledge of both German and morphology, I cannot be certain without access to Farr that the description has not become inaccurate. Furthermore, an adequate lead is lacking from the article.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Inline referencing appears to be adequate, although I do not have access to the printed sources. Information is consistent with other sources online and does not appear to be original research.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Aside from the issues in translation discussed above, there is no discussion of similar species (e.g., other Trichia spp.) and how this species might be distinguished from others. The description of the distribution is sparse. It lives on deadwood worldwide: does it have any further preferences in terms of temperature or habitat? Is it eaten by anything? Taxonomic synonyms are not further discussed. Bruce Ing's separation of Trichia decipiens var. olivacea from the species as T. meylanii is not discussed.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * No neutrality issues.
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * No signs of edit-warring in page history.
 * 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):
 * The image is not captioned. The caption should state what part of T. decipiens this represents.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Unfortunately, due to the issues with translation and the significantly less-than-broad state of the article, I cannot recommend this as a good article at present. I suggest consulting Farr directly to make sure the technical terms are accurate. While none are presently Good Articles, a number of articles on fungi (e.g., Fomitiporia ellipsoidea) are Featured Articles. I suggest that these would be useful models for the present article. and  may be able to provide useful peer reviews. I have also affixed a number of references below which may be useful in expanding the article.


 * Provides an extensive description and a list of synonyms, but check against modern literature to be sure the species concept has not changed.
 * http://eumycetozoa.com/data/report.php?busca=Arcyria&por=gensi&numr=974&tipo=Rtax
 * List of synonymies, with links to many of the original descriptions.
 * Possible report of beetles feeding on T. decipiens.
 * As above.
 * Beetle species found exclusively feeding on T. decipiens.
 * Discussion of the "spore-like bodies".
 * Describes the development of the capillitium.
 * Beetle species found exclusively feeding on T. decipiens.
 * Discussion of the "spore-like bodies".
 * Describes the development of the capillitium.
 * Discussion of the "spore-like bodies".
 * Describes the development of the capillitium.
 * Describes the development of the capillitium.