User talk:Sasata/Archive 8

Wikileave
From June 4 to ~ June 20. I'll be somewhere that looks like this --->

DYK for Amanita bisporigera
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 00:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Suillus sibiricus
Hi Sasata. The only problem I had with devising this new article was the existence of two subspecies (subsp. sibiricus and subsp. helveticus) according to some sources. I have no information as to the morphological differences between the two other than "subsp. sibiricus is darker" from the German wikipedia. It appears subsp. sibiricus occurs in Siberia, wheras subsp. helveticus is wholly European. All this makes out the North American versions... what? Not much information about this one, but it's nonetheless an interesting species. And I hope you have a fruitful wikileave.--Paffka (talk) 19:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I noticed that too about the subspecies; this paper may be able to shed some more light on the subject. I'll dig into the literature some more and add what I can find to the article, then probably put it up for GAN when I get back. It would be nice to have a healthy set of Suillus GAs for the Fungi WikiProject :) Sasata (talk) 19:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Leucopholiota
Harmaja has combined Amylolepiota into Leucopholiota (can't believe I didn't notice it was relevant to you before!). Not sure how trusty this move is, but she characterise the species as having only differences at the ecological level and in gill attachment, so unless we decide with Knudsen that they are synonyms, it's relevant to discuss in the "similar species" section. All the dirty stuff is in one-page preview. It's interesting to note that we had one genus in Tricholomataceae and the other in Agaricaceae... Circéus (talk) 17:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * How am I supposed to get this project done if the taxonomists keep changing their minds? Thanks for the update - have added it to the "to-do" list. Sasata (talk) 15:10, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Fossa (animal)
Materialscientist (talk) 18:02, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Fossa (animal)
Hi, I am reviewing this GA nomination of yours and have made some comments at Talk:Fossa (animal)/GA1. Thanks, Xtzou ( Talk ) 14:09, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Hurricane Eloise
Howdy, hope you're enjoying your time off. When you return, could you please take one more look at Hurricane Eloise (I added some more info from those sources you mentioned) and let me know how close you think it is to FA? Once I get "done" with that article, I plan on moving on to Bonnie '98 and looking at those journals you provided last year. Cheers, Juliancolton (talk) 18:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Julian. Glad to see you used some of the sources I sent. I looked at some of the ones you didn't use, but honestly, they're rather technical and mostly over my head (so you won't hear any complaints from me about why they're not in there!). I think the article's ready for an FAC run; there's a few small issues with the prose, but nothing that wouldn't be easily sorted out during the FAC. Have you tried a Google Book search for additional sources to use? This source claims 21 deaths in the USA and over $1 billion in damage (different than the article), so you might want to check that out. (and this one says 43 deaths?) This book talks about flooding in the Susquehanna Valley, an Eloise remnant. This has extra data on sea severity due to Eloise. Also, why is Schwartz (2007) (available online here, btw) listed as a source but is not cited as a reference? Anyways, there's lots of listed sources for Eloise, so I'm sure you can find some more tidbits to add to the article. Good luck with the FAC! Sasata (talk) 15:12, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Pileus images
At, I posed the question Why are there no views of real fungi at Pileus (mycology)? Can you respond?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:00, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Krill FAR
Hi Sasata! I am just stopping by to ask if you would like to visit the featured article review for Krill (the review page can be found at Featured article review/Krill/archive1)? An editor has done quite a bit of work on the article, but I would like to get the opinions of a couple of biology people who are active at FAC before I close the review. Thanks in advance if you have the time and interest; if not, no biggie! Dana boomer (talk) 01:16, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comment at this FAR, Sasata! Between your comments on my FACs and the quick response on this FAR, you're fast becoming one of my go-to people for biology-article-related issues :) Dana boomer (talk) 14:31, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * No problem, I'll try to pitch in to help save the article during the FAR. Sasata (talk) 16:22, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Focus Stacking
I thought here was a better place than FPC. Were the pictures taken on a tripod with fairly consistent lighting? If so I'd imagine its probably software technique that is to blame. Using CombineZP, press align and balance used frames, then pyramid maximum contrast usually works pretty well for me (most of my fungi shots are now stacks). I'm on holidays so could probably have a go at a set if you like. Noodle snacks (talk) 11:42, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I did use a tripod, but the pics still seem to be slightly out of frame; I think this may be because the ground was covered with lichens and moss, and depressing the shoot button made the whole apparatus move slightly. I can't really tell any difference with the lighting, although the software I'm using for focus stacking (Helicon Focus for Mac) says it differs by 0.1-0.2%. I'm going to fiddle around with the software a bit (i.e., I may actually read the instructions) and I'll take you up on your offer if I can't get a better result myself. Sasata (talk) 16:18, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I don't have Helion Focus, so can't really offer much guidance there. You can fix the tripod moving problem by turning on mirror lockup/live view and using a two second self timer. If you remember, use M so the exposure is consistent. Probably about f9-f10 and whatever shutter speed. Move the focus in very small increments for best results. That said, the software should be able to fix mild alignment problems. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:39, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Linnaeus
Hello! I hope you have had a nice Wikibreak! Did you have time to research something for the Linnaeus article? :)

I am currently working on a new section about his children that I think would be relevant to include. Esuzu ( talk  •  contribs ) 14:20, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The vacation was fun, but too short :) I did get a chance to read through several of the articles I brought along, and am planning to work on it this weekend (need to get to the library to find a textbook). Do you have a timeline in mind for FAC? Sasata (talk) 16:11, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I have not thought about the timeline very much yet actually. I think I could finish the Children section and the commemoration sections in two weeks (I could probably do less as well). And hopefully I could have added some more info the the "Philosophical views" section as well then. How long do you think it will take for you? Should we Peer Review it? Esuzu  ( talk ) 17:12, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Two weeks sounds about right. Peer review never hurts, but we should make sure in that case to review a couple of others (I try to avoid adding to the backlog of review processes). Sasata (talk) 00:46, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes reviewing other articles is a must. I tend to do it all the time. Lately I have been more busy than I intended but I still hope I will make it in time. Esuzu  ( talk ) 07:56, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Elakala Falls DYK question
I know you participate quite a lot in the DYK process, and this is my first nomination, could you lend me a hand with the procedure or let me know if there is something wrong with my nomination. I'm a little perplexed and confused by the whole process. — raeky ( talk 00:20, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I just suggested a small tweak in the hook, everything should be fine. Sasata (talk) 00:44, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! — raeky ( talk 00:51, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

GRB 970228 FAC
Hey mate, I just finished going through your list of potential sources for GRB 970228 at its FAC. As I suspected, most mentioned the burst only in passing, though there were two sources which I added to the article. There was also one that I couldn't find the fulltext for. Any chance you could send me the PDF?

Title: Are gamma-ray bursts due to isotropic fireballs or cylindrical jets? Possibly useful. Fulltext article needed. Author(s): Huang, YF; Tan, CY; Dai, ZG, et al.   Source: CHINESE ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS Volume: 26 Issue: 4 Pages: 414-423 Published: OCT-DEC 2002

Thanks! --Cryptic C62 · Talk 02:12, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Sasata (talk) 02:44, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 June newsletter
We're half way through 2010, and the end of the WikiCup is in sight! Round 3 is over, and we're down to our final 16. Our pool winners were (A),  (B, and the round's overall leader),  (C)  and  (D, joint), but, with the scores reset, everything is to play for in our last pooled round. The pools will be up before midnight tonight, and have been selected randomly by J Milburn. This will be the toughest round yet, and so, as ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Though unaffiliated with the WikiCup, July sees the third Great Wikipedia Dramaout- a project with not dissimilar goals to the WikiCup. Everyone is welcome to take part and do their bit to contribute to the encyclopedia itself.

If you're interested in the scores for the last round of the Cup, please take a look at WikiCup/History/2010/Round 3 and WikiCup/History/2010/Full/Round 3. Our thanks go to for compiling these. As was predicted, Group C ended up the "Group of Death", with 670 points required for second place, and, therefore, automatic promotion. This round will probably be even tougher- again, the top two from each of the two groups will make it through, while the twelve remaining participants will compete for four wildcard places- good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17

DYK for Clavaria zollingeri
The DYK project (nominate) 12:01, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Marinus Anton Donk DYK
Actually, I think it is NOT catchy at all XD. I'd think the yeast culturing bit is a much more interesting hook. Mind you, I also suspect the article is short on prose for DYK in its current state. As a side-note, am I the only one who can't get JSTOR to work at the moment? I just get empty files. It's really frustrating. Circéus (talk) 07:53, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Mycologia is available on Cybertruffle's web archive (as are quite a few other mycology journals), but Persoonia is not. The obit says the first issue of 1973 is to include a bibliography of Donk's writing (and presumably an obituary). Circéus (talk) 19:05, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Review request
Would you have time to have a look at List of parasites of the marsh rice rat, currently at FLC? It isn't getting much traction so far. Ucucha 16:33, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll have a look. I have a couple of featured lists I'm working on myself that are just about ready to go "live", and I need to build up my reviewer karma. Sasata (talk) 16:40, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I've also been doing that on FLC, but it doesn't seem to be paying off too well (except that I read some interesting lists). Ucucha 17:41, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You'd probably have better success with List of parasites of WWF wrestlers, or List of rat species found in Major League Baseball Stadiums :) Sasata (talk) 17:57, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Not to mention Marsh Rice Rat discography and List of concert tours by the Rat Parasites ;) Ucucha, don't be afraid to be more aggresive in your FLC reviews (e.g., "By the way, my list X is at FLC and I would appreciate it if you could take a look"). In general, I think reviewers should be less afraid to advertise their own nominations. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:16, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the advice and also for the great suggestions for future featured lists. I'll think of it. Ucucha 18:57, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * LMAO!! I love those suggestions, particularly List of rat species found in Major League Baseball Stadiums!  Anyway, if I can finish Silky Sifaka for Erik Patel today (getting it to GAC), then I will review the list candidate before the sun goes down on my last "day off" until September. –   VisionHolder  « talk »  16:24, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Hi Sasata, can you revisit the FLC when you get the chance? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 00:20, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Another review
I'm not asking for anything formal, but I was wondering if you could read over and comment on Subfossil lemur whenever you have time. (I know you're busy, so it can wait.) It will likely be my next FAC. Also, the article mentions a coprophilous fungus (Sporormiella spp.), so it might be up your alley. ;-) Anyway, take your time.  If I can finish revising Silky Sifaka for Erik Patel as I promised today, I may try to help out with whatever you have up for review. Best, –   VisionHolder  « talk »  15:58, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I had a quick read yesterday, it was very interesting. If it's still in the GAN queue in a day or two, I'll review it formally; am going to try to finish up the Fossa lit review today so we can get that ball rolling again. Sasata (talk) 16:14, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks like the review is already in good hands ... I'll be there at the FAC :) Sasata (talk) 16:24, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Review of biography of Richard Summerbell
Thank you for your very rapid review on July 3 of the biolography of mycologist Richard Summerbell. Unfortunately, the bio wasn't completed at the time of your review. The page was created on June 29 but I needed expert help with the mycology part, as my primary interest is in the biographies of Canadian gay activists (of whom Summerbell was one). You may wish to have a second look at this bio, now that the mycology section is complete. Ross Fraser (talk) 00:52, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good! I added italics to the Latin names and made some other minor formatting tweaks. The bare external links should ideally be converted into web citation templates (or at least something more descriptive than a naked link), so I may do that sometime, but I'd say the article is pretty close to a "B"-class. Thanks for contributing this article on an interesting Canadian. Sasata (talk) 01:39, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the many formatting changes! I'm not sure what you mean by "bare external links" but I've fixed some references that listed the url instead of showing it as an external link icon.  If there is something remaining that still qualifies as a naked link, please let me know.

Ross Fraser (talk) 04:43, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Pseudoplectania
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 06:03, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Charles E. Fairman
 — Rlevse • Talk  • 18:04, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Sanctioned name
-- Cirt (talk) 06:03, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Fungi Heaven
Awesome stuff you've been getting to ga... I've been reading them! I'll be getting back into the reviewing game soon; just spent 8 days laid up in the hospital from severe food poisoning. Broccoli of all things! Odd. All well now, thankfully :) Just wanted to drop a kudos to you and your reviewers! Rcej (Robert) - talk 01:33, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Broccoli?! That's like a miracle food, I make my family eat it every day. Glad to hear you're better; there will soon be a steady stream of fungal articles appearing in the GAN queue... Ucucha's been doing a great job of keeping the natural sciences section under control. I hope I can keep up with my share of reviewing in the months to come :) Sasata (talk) 01:42, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Marinus Anton Donk
The DYK project (nominate) 06:05, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK nom for orange bright yellow, golden, blah, blah, blah
That is a brilliant hook. — Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  05:37, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I figured it would be a good way to avoid trying to come up with 11 separate hooks about subjects that are probably only marginally interesting to someone other than me :) Sasata (talk) 15:34, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Job Bicknell Ellis
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 06:02, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Ceratobasidium
Hello! Your submission of Ceratobasidium at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 15:18, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Quick favor
I don't know if you've messed with ITN (In The News) much, but I've got a primate article up under the heading "Last common ancestor of apes and Old World Monkeys found" (July 15) and need a few more comments for it to post. You're very knowledgeable about biology articles, so I was hoping you'd have a moment to comment. In return, I'll try to look up one of your pending GACs or your next FAC when I get home tomorrow and do a review. –  VisionHolder  « talk »  17:11, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * It just got posted, so it's a little too late perhaps. However, I have another question (both for you and Visionholder, and anyone else happening to read this). I'm considering creating an article on Miniopterus in Madagascar and the Comoros (Miniopterus is a bat genus of about 30 living species [up from 11 in 1992, and I know of at least three undescribed ones] with a broad distribution in the tropical Old World and a rather confused taxonomy). I think such an article could be valuable in giving an overview of the intricately linked taxonomic histories of the species and their distinguishing traits; on the other hand, I don't think any similar articles exist yet. What do you think? Ucucha 18:14, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Personally, I'd have no problem with it. The title is specific to both the genus and location, and if you have the sources to prove its noteworthy, then I don't see a problem.  (I'd consider it a sub-article of the genus page.)  I know other people get their panties in a bundle over article titles and scopes.  I realize the importance of a good title and appropriate scope, but sometimes detailed topics defy simply classification.  Hope this helps. –   VisionHolder  « talk »  18:25, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If I can butt in, I would not condone any such article before Miniopterus is brought to a reasonable state of development (it currently is only a list of species), least it be savagely merged into that article (and I'd be first in line to perform the merging edits). Circéus (talk) 22:24, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments. Circeus, that's true; I'm also planning to work on that. But Miniopterus is a widespread, diverse, and fairly well-studied genus; and when there is a good article on it, the information on Malagasy bats would get undue weight. (Though I do think I'd prefer to do the Malagasy article before the genus article without things being merged: it's easier to work from the bottom up.) Ucucha 06:06, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't really have anything to add to this conversation, other than I finally got around to watching Avatar today, and I was reminded of VisionHolder when I saw the alien lemurs. Sasata (talk) 05:18, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I have to jump in on sight of a pop culture nod, but you'd think Pandora would've had some bioluminescent mushrooms on steroids in at least one scene. I looked for them. lol Rcej (Robert) - talk 06:35, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

Trogia
Did you see this article? I can't access the full version but I was thinking that it might say what species is responsible. Smartse (talk) 17:24, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up! I have access, and will fill out the details soon. Sasata (talk) 17:31, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I added a bit, but the identity of the species wasn't mentioned. I'm guessing they haven't had enough time to figure that out yet. Sasata (talk) 22:00, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries, I managed to get access in the end. Do you think it should say that the taxonomist deduced it is a new species? Smartse (talk) 09:55, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Ceratobasidium
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:03, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius rufulus
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:03, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

For being generally awesome...

 * Thanks JM! I may have to narrow my focus somewhat if I ever plan to get "finished", but have been finding that hard to do because there's so many interesting aspects of fungi. I'll get a featured topic someday though... Sasata (talk) 02:26, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius affinis
Courcelles (talk) 12:03, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius alnicola
Courcelles (talk) 12:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius argillaceifolius
Courcelles (talk) 12:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius aspideoides
Courcelles (talk) 12:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius deceptivus
Courcelles (talk) 12:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius fallax
Courcelles (talk) 12:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius fumosus
Courcelles (talk) 12:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius pubescens
Courcelles (talk) 12:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius repraesentaneus
Courcelles (talk) 12:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius subflammeus
Courcelles (talk) 12:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius torminosus
Courcelles (talk) 12:05, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Milkcaps
Congratulations on your milkcap DYK coup! I saw that on the front page and couldn't help wanting to give a virtual pat on the back to the author of an eleven-fold hook like that. Well done. — AlekJDS talk 12:32, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your note, but this is just a warmup for a much larger multi-mushroom hook currently in research and development :) Sasata (talk) 16:00, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * You're not going to beat this, are you? ;-) Well, congratulations, and good luck on the next one. Ucucha 16:04, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, the bot made a right mess and signed my name to do it! In all seriousness, that was great work. Courcelles (talk) 19:44, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow....11-fold. The only other I think it can be done with is Russula....it's got me thinknig about doing one with birds or some proteaceae or other....

Amanita
Hi, Sasata. IIRC when I GA-reviewed Amanita abrupta we agreed that the article about the genus Amanita should be improved to include the points needed to support Amanita abrupta. How's progress on that? --Philcha (talk) 06:06, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reminding me. I started a life cycle section in Agaricales, probably the most appropriate high-level taxon article (although a case could be made for moving it up even more into the Agaricomycetes). I need to spend some time with a drawing program to make a life-cycle diagram (1000 words and all that). Sasata (talk) 16:05, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Trogia
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 12:02, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Tobacco smoke enema
Sorry my reply took a while. Personal life overtook Wikipedia life for a few days.

I'd hoped to develop this as an FAC but I don't think the source material exists. Still, its an interesting diversion :) Parrot of Doom 21:59, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Strobilomyces foveatus
Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 18:02, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Ecology
Sorry for the delay in getting back to your feedback on ecology. I had to take a break while I worked on my thesis. I've been back poking away at the article and going over your review edits. Once I complete them I will nominate once again for GA review. I've spent a bit of time restructuring the article and re-wording some of the text and think it is improving as you indicated. Thanks for all your feedback and sorry for the long intermission.Thompsma (talk) 19:08, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Phlebopus
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 12:03, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 July newsletter
We are half-way through our penultimate round, and nothing is yet certain. Pool A, currently led by has ended up the more competitive, with three contestants (,  and ) scoring over 500 points already. Pool B is led by, who has also scored well over 500. The top two from each pool, as well as the next four highest scorers regardless of pool, will make it through to our final eight. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Planning has begun for the 2011 WikiCup, with open discussions concerning scoring and flags for next year's competition. Contributions to those discussions would be appreciated, especially concerning the flags, as next year's signups cannot begin until the flag issue has been resolved. Signups will hopefully open at some point in this round, with discussion about possible changing in the scoring/process opening some time afterwards.

Earlier this round, we said goodbye to, who has bowed out to spend more time on the book he is authoring with his wife. We wish him all the best. In other news, the start of this round also saw some WikiCup awards sent out by. We appreciate his enthusiasm, and contestants are of course welcome to award each other prizes as they see fit, but rest assured that we will be sending out "official" awards at the end of the competition. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 22:46, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Family confusion
Based on the sources I used while writing a new article, as well as the listing of the other species articles, I changed the family for Crinipellis from Marasmiaceae to Tricholomataceae, but I'm not certain whether I was right to do so. We seem to have articles contradicting each other. Could you possibly check the sources you deem most reliable and fix the genus/species (as well as family) articles as appropriate? I'd trust you to get it right before I'd trust myself- the whole situation's a little messy. (On a loosely related note, I came across the likes of List of Tricholomataceae genera and List of Agaricales families- have you considered nominating this kind of thing for featured list status? They look great...) J Milburn (talk) 19:25, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've fixed all the Crinipellis taxa to Marasmiaceae, after looking at Kirk 2008, Fungorum, and MycoBank. To answer your other question—yes. They (and some others) are in the works :) Sasata (talk) 20:27, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * God, you're good. J Milburn (talk) 21:33, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Lol - I just know how to use these stacks of books around me :) Sasata (talk) 21:41, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * In case you're interested, I've nominated the lead image from Crinipellis zonata for FP status. J Milburn (talk) 22:02, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm interested, but I think that while it's attractive and has very high EV, it's just not quite up to FP technical standards. Its lack of sharpness (especially in the stem—stacking would have helped here), and some blown whites in the cap (combined with the slightly saturated colors overall) means I can't support this one. On the other hand, I think the article itself is in pretty good shape for a GAN, would you like to put it in the queue? Personally, I'd go for American English (based on its distribution) and list-defined refs, but don't care too much either way. Sasata (talk) 00:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I tried to go for American English (note "odor") but, obviously, I instinctively write in British English! I agree with American English, please feel free to change anything, and I have no preference for refs, you're welcome to change them. I'll nominate for GA and put you down as a co-nom, as you've clearly given it the umph that it needs. J Milburn (talk) 11:27, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much, that was quick! J Milburn (talk) 19:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Ucucha's a speed demon. Chalk up another GA for the Fungi Wikiproject! Sasata (talk) 19:36, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

While on this, we currently have Marasmiaceae defined per Dictionary of the Fungi, i.e. sensu lato incl. Omphalotaceae (which if I understand right forms a sister clade to Marasmiaceae s.s.). Shouldn't we define both circumscription in so far as we apparently recognize Omphalotaceae as a separate group too? Circéus (talk) 19:45, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Argh... there's so much to do. I will work on this and bring the classification to date with Dictionary of the Fungi, after I check the literature to see if there's been any relevant phylogenetics published post-2008. Sasata (talk) 19:57, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok it should be mostly fixed now. Sasata (talk) 22:30, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Loretta Jones
Are you busy? Can you do some copy editing on the page? Thankyou. RAIN the ONE  (Talk) 16:35, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, not terribly interested and time is precious. Sasata (talk) 21:55, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about it. I guess that massive list of DYK's would take my days up too. Happy editing. RAIN the ONE  (Talk) 20:57, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Sasata,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Rhodotus palmatus2.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on August 12, 2010. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2010-08-12. BTW, did you take the photo? In the FPC nomination, you claimed credit for it, but on the upload page it's credited to someone at Mushroom Observer.  howcheng  {chat} 20:31, 10 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Cool! No, Dan Molter took the picture, I see that was an error in my FPC nomination; the author and source info in the file page is correct. Sasata (talk) 20:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Sources for Mesopropithecus
I'm thinking about finishing up the Mesopropithecus article for a FAC run in the near future, and I was wondering if you would mind emailing me the sources you listed on the talk page a while back. And if you don't mind, I would appreciate a list of articles for Hadropithecus as well since that may follow. Thanks! –  VisionHolder « talk » 05:57, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll have those emailed sometime today. Sasata (talk) 15:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ I didn't bother sending the two with Babakotia in the title, as I figured you'd have those already. Most of the older ones I don't have electronic access to. Now get working on those FACs! Sasata (talk) 15:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Family Guy GAs
If you are aware of other Family Guy GAs which do not meet the GA criteria, please open individual or community reassessments for them. You can also, if you prefer, add GA request to an article talk page to request other editors to look at an article with a view to reassessing its GA status. Thanks, Geometry guy 20:35, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Eduard Folayang
Hello Sasata,

thanks for the message. I've added a few more informations to the article. I hope it's ok now. Please let me know if there is still something wrong. Cheers -- <font color="	#008000" >Joaquin008 ( talk ) 18:20, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Leave
I'll be away until August 20. Stay thirsty, my friends. Sasata (talk) 14:40, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Though I don't drink beer all the time, when I do ... I will ;) Rcej (Robert) - talk 00:48, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Take lotsa photos :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:22, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Xanthoria elegans
Hey- you said you'd be back today, so welcome back for when you are! Which edit to feature hasn't been decided- your input would be appreciated. J Milburn (talk) 22:00, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Eustrombus gigas peer review
Greetings Sasata! I know you are a very experienced editor and a regular contributor in en:Wikipedia, responsible for several successful Featured Articles. I've read most of them, and they are awesome articles indeed! Recently I've submitted the E. gigas article to a peer review, in order to further improve it since GA nomination. Your help in that endeavor would be greatly appreciated. Best wishes! --Daniel Cavallari (talk) 12:13, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Daniel, I will drop by with comments sometime this week. It's about time you gastropod-lovers had a FA! Sasata (talk) 18:24, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Re:Lamella (mycology)
Yeah, stupid mistake on my part, I'm glad there's someone watching my back... I was struck by the pretty gills while I was working on the fungi portal, and I thought it was a solid improvement on picture already there (an olddddd FP I have nominated for delisting); I thought it was doubly useful as it showed some latex, which I mentioned in the article. J Milburn (talk) 18:13, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

"Synonyms"
I've been going through your Cortinarius DYK articles, and one thing struck me as I fixed a small detail: it seems mildly disingenuous to refer to a different placement as a "synonym" without any context. Taking Cortinarius purpurascens for an example, Phlegmacium purpurascens cannot by definition be anything other than a synonym as long as the species is in Cortinarius! Using "is considered" implies that it might eventually be considered separate (as is actually possible for the various synonyms given in the Cortinarius varius infobox). What do you think? Circéus (talk) 16:29, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree, I haven't put a lot of thought into the taxonomy yet, I mostly just used the synonym lists from Fungorum or MycoBank and "dumped" them into the taxonomy section. That's why I rated the articles as "C" :) Over the next month or so I'll try to iron out the defects to try to get them to GA status. Am currently looking for a good monograph or other literature on the genus to help, but unfortunately the best options are in languages other than English. Sasata (talk) 16:59, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've been working on Wikispecies (on the Senecioneae). Don't even get me started on the literature issues I run into >_< Circéus (talk) 21:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * (sigh) there is always the issue over splitting of Cortinarius, so all the Dermocybes and Phlegmaciums could oscillate...another reason Hesperian and I have held off pushing Banksia to FAC is the ongoing debate about dryandras into banksia..although largely settled :/ Casliber (talk · contribs) 23:28, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Let me guess: the problem is with the way a full subgeneric classification is currently in a bit of a limbo? Pushing back necessary stuff like that happen all the time in taxonomy, for many reasons, I guess. The various philosophical debates in the field over (amongst others) taxa definitions and the acceptability of paraphily obviously do not help.
 * e.g. Rutaceae is still waiting for an investigation into its potential synapomorphies, and--I just came across that--over a dozen species of Briza have to be moved into Chascolytrum at some point to join the six that have been previously segregated ( makes one of the combinations, but only because they are also publishing a subspecific name under it). And god knows when they'll get around to really start breaking up Senecio. Circéus (talk) 00:31, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of synonyms, Circéus, I dropped your name at my current FAC. Opinions about redirects for synonyms? Sasata (talk) 16:16, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

A request...
Hi Sasata! As you usually find a source or two that I missed on my FACs, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind checking out an article in advance for me, so that it's more prepared pre-FAC? The article is Andalusian horse, and I would like to take it to FAC the week after Labor Day weekend (I can't remember if you're from the US...if not, it's the first weekend in September). I know that you've got a lot going on with your entries for the Cup, so if you don't have time I understand. If you are able to take a look, however, it is much appreciated. Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 14:25, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll have a look sometime today or tomorrow. Sasata (talk) 15:34, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ On talk page. Sasata (talk) 00:53, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Awesome, thanks. I've glanced at them, but will take a closer look tomorrow. Dana boomer (talk) 01:16, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I've gone through and made notations next to all of the articles, and there are several that I think look interesting that I cannot access. I don't know if you have the talk page watchlisted, but I wanted to let you know just in case you didn't. Dana boomer (talk) 12:52, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Sasata (talk) 16:49, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Re:Move
Done :) J Milburn (talk) 17:08, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Let me know when you nominate it, I'll review it for you, if you like. J Milburn (talk) 17:21, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That's very kind. I'll be adding a few to the GAN queue soon, after some polishing. Sasata (talk) 17:31, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yours seem to get snapped up so quick! J Milburn (talk) 09:13, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Twyfelfontein/GA1
I think I have addressed most of your preliminary concerns. If it is not sufficient, please let me know. Thanks again for the review, Pgallert (talk) 11:12, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Cross-posting from Talk:Twyfelfontein/GA1, not sure if you maybe took it off your watchlist already.
 * Thanks, Sasata for the work spent on this. I have one formal point that I think I should tell: While you promoted the article to GA I was busy with a very complicated edit converting the Ouzman reference to Harvard style and expanding the archaeology section. In order not to lose this jigsaw-type of edit, I basically reverted your changes and re-inserted them afterwards. Hope this is fine with you. --Pgallert (talk) 16:43, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Auricularia auricula-judae
Hey, I've just expanded this as a Halloween DYK, and I'd love to send it to GAC- could you possibly take a look at the taxonomy section and make any necessary corrections? I don't really want to make a pig's ear (hohoho) of it. Really interesting and pretty important little mushroom; I was shocked that we didn't have a longer article. J Milburn (talk) 18:19, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes it gets quite a few hits (well, by mushroom article standards) probably due to its edibility and use in traditional medicine. There's actually room for quite a bit of expansion... check out Pubmed for a sample; I get over a hundred hits from the Web of Knowledge as well. The synonym list is also lengthy. I'll have a look in the next couple of days and give it a tweaking. Let me know if you're interested in a FAC push after the GA. Sasata (talk) 18:36, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd absolutely love that, but, until I'm back at university, I don't have access to the kind of databases you do. Thanks- no rush. J Milburn (talk) 18:40, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

User:TonyTheTiger/sandbox/cup
It appears that you are one of the finalists. I have put together a summary chart for us to sort of get to know each other. Feel free to come by and fill in User:TonyTheTiger/sandbox/cup.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:08, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
 * This has been moved into the mainspace at WikiCup/History/2010/finalists‎. You are one of the only two not yet to add themselves.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:40, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for stopping by. When you get a chance link your historical submissions.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:08, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/Hevea semillas2.jpg
Scale's been added, just so you know. J Milburn (talk) 22:24, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 August newsletter
We have our final eight! The best of luck to those who remain. A bumper newsletter this week as we start our home straight.


 * Pool A's winner was . Awarded the top score overall this round, Sturmvogel_66 writes primarily on military history, favouring Naval warfare.
 * Pool B's winner was . Awarded the top score for featured articles this round, Casliber writes primarily on natural sciences, especially botany and ornithology.
 * Pool A's close second was . Awarded the top score for featured pictures this round, Sasata writes primarily on natural sciences, favouring mycology.
 * Pool B's close second was . Awarded the top score for good articles and topics this round, ThinkBlue primarily writes content related to television and film, including 30 Rock.
 * The first wildcard was . Awarded the top score for did you knows and valued pictures this round, TonyTheTiger writes on a number of topics, including baseball, American football and Chicago.
 * The second wildcard was . Someone who has helped the Cup behind the scenes all year, White Shadows said "I'm still in shock that I made it this far" and writes primarily on Naval warfare, especially U-boats.
 * The third wildcard was . Awarded the top score for featured lists and topics this round, Staxringold primarily writes on sport and television, including baseball and 30 Rock.
 * The fourth wildcard was . Entering the final eight only on the final day of the round, William S. Saturn writes on a number of topics, mostly related to Texas.

We say goodbye to the six who fell at the final hurdle. only just missed out on a place in the final eight. was not far behind. was awarded top points for in the news this round. contributed a variety of did you know articles. said "I'm surprised to have survived so far into the competition", but was extactic to see Finland in the semi-finals. did not score this round, but has scored highly in previous rounds. We also say goodbye to, who withdrew earlier this month after spending six weeks overseas. Anyone interested in this round's results can see them here and here. Thank you to for these.

Signups for next year's competition are now open. Planning is ongoing, with a key discussion about judges for next year open. Discussion about how next year's scoring will work is ongoing, and thoughts are more than welcome at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. Also, TonyTheTiger is compiling some information and statistics on the finalists here- the final eight are encouraged to add themselves to the list.

Our final eight will play it out for two months, after which we will know 2010's WikiCup winner, and a variety of prizes will be awarded. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:15, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Topics
I was curious to as why you never bothered with FTs/GTs. You have so many GAs/FAs that I am sure if you care about topics you could put together several. Nergaal (talk) 18:07, 1 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I've mostly been writing about species, so a FT/GT with a genus and all the species would be a likely candidate. However, the usual problem is that there are only a few species that are well-known (or for which free-license pictures are available), and the remainder are very little-known, having been written about only sparsely in the literature, or in foreign language journals I can't read or easily access. It also gets repetitive writing about species from the same genus for too long, and it's more fun for me to just move on to another interesting genus. I've been toying with the idea of trying to get the species in List of deadly fungi organized into a topic, but there's still a massive amount of work to be done. I plan to stick around for a while though, hopefully it won't be too long before there's a fungal topic. Sasata (talk) 18:26, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Tracheal intubation GA process
Hello Sasata. Many thanks to you and your wife for all the time you have spent in reviewing the tracheal intubation article, and for making such helpful and constructive comments. I am glad to all of our work has finally paid off. Having invested so heavily in this article by now, I think perhaps I should try and take it through the FAC process. Do you think this is a good idea, and if so, what should be my next step? Regards, DiverDave (talk) 02:06, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That's a great idea! I think you'll be ready to go after a copyedit from some fresh eyes. Ping if you need any further assistance. Cheers, Sasata (talk) 05:07, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK query
Could you check Template_talk:Did_you_know? Thanks Smartse (talk) 16:22, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ Sasata (talk) 19:25, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Sarcoscypha dudleyi
Hello! Your submission of Sarcoscypha dudleyi at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Zoeperkoe (talk) 03:45, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Re:Question
Nope, you don't. If you upload the images to Commons, you can tag them with this template, which covers the full works. A note saying you have their permission (if you do) could help, but, basically, it's not something that concerns us unless the subject complains (and even then, it's not an auto-delete). From my experience, a lot of people prefer portraits where you get across who the person is at FPC, so taking the picture with a chess-board in front of them or something similar could really help your chances. Good luck! As a rule, I love portraits at FPC, so you'll probably be getting a support from me. J Milburn (talk) 21:26, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Coprinellus impatiens
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:02, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Cortinarius delibutus
-- Cirt (talk) 06:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Cortinarius anomalus
-- Cirt (talk) 06:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Cortinarius cinnamomeus
-- Cirt (talk) 06:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Cortinarius hemitrichus
-- Cirt (talk) 06:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Cortinarius infractus
-- Cirt (talk) 06:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Cortinarius praestans
-- Cirt (talk) 06:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Cortinarius purpurascens
-- Cirt (talk) 06:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Cortinarius traganus
-- Cirt (talk) 06:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Cortinarius varius
-- Cirt (talk) 06:04, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for William Russell Dudley
The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Sarcoscypha dudleyi
The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Hygrophorus eburneus
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 18:02, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Lactarius sanguifluus
The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Ceratobasidium cornigerum
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 18:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Fomes fomentarius
Sorry to bug you with this stuff again, but I had a look at the sources for the taxonomy of the species, and I was more than a little overwhelmed. Not as bad as Jew's Ear (I don't think there'd be much that is...), but still too much for me. If you find the time, a decent taxonomy section would be really appreciated. J Milburn (talk) 18:24, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, I'll work on it in a week or so when I get back from vacation. I'm currently limited to hotel internet and a crappy laptop, so I have minimal wikipower. Sasata (talk) 03:41, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Cool, thanks very much. Enjoy your trip! J Milburn (talk) 09:07, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Coprinopsis variegata
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:02, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Gastropod peer review
Hi there Sasata! The Eustrombus gigas article is still under peer review, and many improvements have been made. If you feel like it, please leave a comment or two! I'd really appreaciate your help. Best, Daniel Cavallari (talk) 15:45, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Will do, give me a day or two. Sasata (talk) 17:03, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Ping...
Not sure which is the best email acct to get you on, so used the one attached to this page. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:22, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Poisonous amanitas template
Any thought on this possible template to link together poisonous amanitas? Circéus (talk) 23:41, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I like it. Looks like there's some more articles to write... Sasata (talk) 23:53, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Most are picked off List of Amanita species, with a few gotten off Internet references (e.g. for nephrotoxic species). The reports appear quite conflicting regarding A. brunnescens, so for the time being I'm not including it. Circéus (talk) 00:11, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah - bit of a mystery that one...I guess no-one's game to eat it :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:14, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Andalusian FAC
Hi Sasata! Thanks again for the literature review that you did on Andalusian horse! The article is currently at FAC (Featured article candidates/Andalusian horse/archive1), and has gone into the urgent reviews section. Reviews are coming rather slowly (big surprise, right?), so if you have a second to take a look, it would be great! If you don't, no worries - you've been a huge help already with all of the articles you've located :) Thanks in advance, Dana boomer (talk) 00:15, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, I will visit soon. Sasata (talk) 14:45, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Re:Auricularia auricula-judae
Thanks :) I'll no doubt continue to patch on it here and there; I think there's more to be said regarding the distribution (no South America? I've not found a concrete source... Also, there seems to be debate about whether it appears in the tropics) and the taxonomy (the length of the synonyms list alone tells us that!) but I think it could be ready for a GA nomination- perhaps the reviewer will be able to offer something. J Milburn (talk) 21:20, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Amanita ravenelii/GA1
Just so you know. J Milburn (talk) 00:51, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Promoted- left another thought on the review page. While I'm here, I nominated Auricularia auricula-judae for GA status- there's a good bit more that needs to be done, but I think it's ready for GA status, and the reviewer will no doubt be helpful in the FA push. J Milburn (talk) 11:51, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

File:Tremella mesenterica.jpg
Hey, can I ask why you didn't use this picture in Tremella mesenterica? It's a featured picture. J Milburn (talk) 14:33, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It looks more like Tremella aurantia than T. mesenterica. Noodlesnacks said he was going to check again with the Australian mycologist that identified it for him in the first place. Sasata (talk) 14:54, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, thanks. J Milburn (talk) 14:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Prodding of Unpleasant odor
Please note that I have deprodded Unpleasant odor that you proposed for deletion. A better idea is to suggest a merge by placing at the top of the page and starting a discussion on why you believe it should be merged. Shaliya waya (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you
Hello there once again, Sasata! Thank you very much for your feedback in the Eustrombus gigas peer review. Your comments have provided a good deal of directives for future improvements. Best wishes, Daniel Cavallari (talk) 01:47, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Strobilomyces foveatus, Mushroom Observer and italics
From my experience (and, on top of the mushrooms, I've done a lot of pop culture stuff where people complain a lot about the wrong thing being italicised) the MOS refers to both the references and the article body. Making exceptions for academic citation styles is one thing, but the template is straight up wrong to suggest that website names should be italicised- to use the same examples, Wikipedia, Facebook, YouTube would not be italicised- neither are webzines (unless that's changed, I remember a discussion about it a long time ago). Neither would you italicise, say, Billboard.com, despite the fact Billboard the magazine most certainly should be italicised. As I say, that template is irritating- so often at GAC or FAC I have been criticised, or criticised people, or seen people being criticised, for using italics in the wrong place, all thanks to that template. J Milburn (talk) 12:16, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Inocybe maculata/GA1
Replied to your various points- article's looking a lot better. No rush to reply, just letting you know. J Milburn (talk) 13:57, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Amanita atkinsoniana
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:02, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Amanita ravenelii
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:02, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Apology
If word has already gotten back to you that I was pissed that you seem to be getting favored treatment, I am noting that I have misinterpreted comments. I apologize for comments regarding you and your participation in the CUP.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:43, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't need any apology Tony. You are making life difficult for the reviewers at DYK who have to spend their time cleaning up your messes, and adding to the backlog at GAN by not performing reviews in equal number to your submissions. Please consider not spoiling what is supposed to be a fun activity for the rest of us. Sasata (talk) 13:58, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Geastrum leptospermum
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 12:40, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Geastrum jurei
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 12:40, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Geastrum quadrifidum
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 12:41, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Geastrum welwitschii
<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 12:41, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Mycena adscendens
Hello! Your submission of Mycena adscendens at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!  Imzadi  1979   →  05:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * All fixed and verified now.  Imzadi  1979   →  06:11, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Clavariadelphus ligula
The DYK project (nominate) 06:02, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Mycena acicula/GA1
I've left a review. J Milburn (talk) 17:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Promoted. That's a particularly pretty mushroom :) J Milburn (talk) 19:06, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Template
It's a shorthand that generates an abbreviated version of the name, with automatic non-breaking space. Essentially a port of the species:Template:splast Wikispecies template used for species lists. It's shorter than the full italicized piped link (and makes templates, in particular, simpler), but admittedly I was possibly too enthusiastic in applying it in mainspace. Circéus (talk) 15:51, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mycena adonis
The article Mycena adonis you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Mycena adonis for things which need to be addressed. Jappalang (talk) 07:43, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 September newsletter
We are half-way through our final round, entering the home straight. leads at the time of writing with 1180 points, immediately followed by with 1175 points. closely follows in third place with 1100 points. For those who are interested, data about the finalists has been compiled at WikiCup/History/2010/finalists, while a list of content submitted by all WikiCup contestants prior to this round has been compiled at WikiCup/History/2010/Submissions. As ever, anything contestants worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Despite controversy, the WikiCup remains open. Signups for next year's competition are more than welcome, and suggestions for how next year's competition will work are appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. More general comments and discussions should be directed at the WikiCup talk page. One month remains in the 2010 WikiCup, after which we will know our champion. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:08, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Myriostoma
The article Myriostoma you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Myriostoma for things which need to be addressed. Jappalang (talk) 01:51, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Horse articles
Hi Sasata, and thank you very much for your GA review! I tried to access the article you recommended (Genetic diversity...) at the PubMed link you gave, but the only thing I could find was an abstract and several corrections to the original document, not the original article itself. Perhaps I am missing something? Also, if you have another minute, would you mind conducting a literature search on Haflinger (horse)? It's my next one up for FAC, and you always manage to find something I miss. Please let me know if there are ever any articles at GAN/FAC/PR that you would like me to take a look at - you've done enough reviews for me that I know I owe you a few! Thanks again, Dana boomer (talk) 19:48, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * My bad, try this link. I'll do the Halfing lit search this evening. Thanks for your offer to review... reviewers have been very generous in quickly reviewing articles I put up for GAN or FAC, but I will be increasing my output later this month, so any review you might undertake then would be greatly appreciated! Sasata (talk) 19:59, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * The idea of you increasing your output is terrifying. J Milburn (talk) 20:01, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mycena acicula
The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mycena adonis
The DYK project (nominate) 06:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mycena adscendens
The DYK project (nominate) 06:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mycena cinerella
The DYK project (nominate) 06:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mycena flavoalba
The DYK project (nominate) 06:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mycena galopus
The DYK project (nominate) 06:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mycena inclinata
The DYK project (nominate) 06:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mycena leptocephala
The DYK project (nominate) 06:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mycena polygramma
The DYK project (nominate) 06:05, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mycena sanguinolenta
The DYK project (nominate) 06:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mycena stylobates
The DYK project (nominate) 06:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Mycena vitilis
The DYK project (nominate) 06:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)