Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Calvatia sculpta/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Karanacs 03:10, 13 October 2011.

Calvatia sculpta

 * Nominator(s): Sasata (talk) 17:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Calvatia sculpta is an unusual-looking edible puffball mushroom found in western United States and Brazil. Although relatively short, I think the article is comprehensive and cites all of the relevant literature. It was GA reviewed by Ucucha. Thanks for reading. Sasata (talk) 17:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:01, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Be consistent in whether ISBNs are hyphenated or not
 * be consistent in whether or not you provide publisher locations for books. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:01, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Both have been made consistent, thanks. Sasata (talk) 18:18, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Comments from J Milburn-
 * "of puffball mushroom" puffball fungus? We may define puffballs as separate from mushrooms
 * Done Sasata (talk) 20:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "and was first recorded from a Brazilian dune in 2008." Rephrase? It reads like a contradiction of the previous phrase
 * Changed to "... and was found in a Brazilian dune in 2008." Sasata (talk) 20:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "to Calvatia caelata" to those of C...?
 * Fixed. Sasata (talk) 20:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "combined the sections Sculpta and Cretacea" To what name?
 * "... he merged the section Cretacea into Sculpta ..." Sasata (talk) 20:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "and even connected at the tip with other warts" Presumably not all the time?
 * Added "sometimes". Sasata (talk) 20:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * "corroborate delimitation of species" Rather technical
 * Simplified. Sasata (talk) 20:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * More on edibility would be great- Do guidebooks recommend eating it raw, or cooking it? How do the Native Americans eat it?
 * I added a sentence about general puffball cookery; I have no more information about Native American usage. Sasata (talk) 20:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * "The Central Miwok used Calvatia sculpta (Harkness) C.G. Lloyd (cited as Lycoperdon sculptum [Harkness]), which they ground, boiled, and ate with acorn soup (Barrett and Gifford 1933)." From, pg. 60. And from Barrett and Gifford, "A specimen of only one fungus was obtained for identification, the Sierra puffball (Lycoperdon sculptum), called by the Central Miwok potokele and patapsi. This puffball was eaten cooked. Usually it was dried in the sun two or three days, pulverized in a mortar, stone-boiled, and eaten with acorn soup.", which can be found here . Would this be useful? Buttonwillowite (talk) 06:54, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * See also . Buttonwillowite (talk) 07:00, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Very useful; I didn't know that Barrett and Gifford was available online. I have added a few more details. Thanks! Sasata (talk) 15:06, 1 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Why have you gone for "edible" in the mycomorphbox, as opposed to "choice"?
 * Both are now included. Sasata (talk) 20:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * You don't mention the spore print in the prose- can one really take a spore print from a puffball?
 * I think of "spore print" more as "spores en masse"; one could take a "spore print" by ripping a mature specimen in half and tapping out the contents onto a piece of paper. Sasata (talk)

Great subject- I like the way you've been able to include speculation about the disjunct populations. The microscopic details, general appearance and the edibility are all interesting factors. J Milburn (talk) 19:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. Sasata (talk) 20:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Support. Taking another look through, I can't see any problems. J Milburn (talk) 20:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Images check out. J Milburn (talk) 19:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Support, with a few small comments: Otherwise, the prose is clear and correct and the sources seem adequately covered. Ucucha (talk) 00:53, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The link to is dead, though for some reason the checklinks tool doesn't find it. I checked it because I wanted to know whether they tested the Brazilian puffballs genetically; perhaps you should explicitly mention that in the article.
 * I'm still confused by it being moved from Lycoperdon to Calvatia because it resembles a species of Calvatia that is now in Lycoperdon, but I don't suppose you can do much about that.
 * Thank-you Ucucha. I replaced the broken link, and explicitly mentioned that the Brazilian specimens were not tested genetically. Have also added a footnote that hopefully clarifies somewhat the taxonomic confusion (and reminds me that I should revisit Handkea utriformis to see if I still agree with the name of that article). Sasata (talk) 03:27, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for making those changes. Ucucha (talk) 12:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Support and comments  Just two minor quibbles; "felty" reads oddly to me, "velvety" perhaps? Also removing from the cold seems clunky &mdash; defrosting perhaps?  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Jim. I changed felty to "felt-like texture", and declunked with "thawing". Sasata (talk) 15:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Support Comments  - casting my eye over it. looks tight prosewise and comprehensive...Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:21, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


 *  removing from the cold -err, why not just "thawing"?


 * " giant western puffball"... - why is the name in quotation marks?
 * Thanks Cas; I fixed the two above. Sasata (talk) 15:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.