Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Panellus stipticus/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 SandyGeorgia 02:26, 7 February 2010.

Panellus stipticus

 * Nominator(s): Sasata (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

The bitter oyster mushroom is one of the best-known of a few dozen mushroom species that glow in the dark. I think the article is comparable to other fungus FACs in terms in comprehensiveness and quality, and look forward to further improvements the FAC process may bring. Sasata (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This is a WikiCup nomination. To the nominator: if you do not intend to submit this article at the WikiCup, feel free to remove this notice. Ucucha 15:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments -
 * What makes http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=styptic a reliable source?
 * The information it is being used as a source for is a recent addition by Circeus, who indicated in his comments that the web source is temporary until he is able is cite it to something more reliable. I will drop a note here when that happens. Sasata (talk) 06:36, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll leave this one out for other reviewers to decide for themselves. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:53, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Circeus has now supplied reliable sources for the etymology. Sasata (talk) 07:37, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Likewise http://www.mushroomexpert.com/panellus_stipticus.html? (Forgive me if we've covered this site before... it's been quite a few FACs since then!)
 * No problem, it was discussed here and here. Sasata (talk) 06:36, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:24, 28 January 2010 (UTC)


 * (Resolved comments moved to talk - Ucucha 23:56, 3 February 2010 (UTC))


 * Support. Comprehensiveness, images, prose, use of sources all appear good. An exemplary article on an interesting fungus. Ucucha 23:56, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Support - Yay fungus! Wasn't this stuff used in the movie Avatar? Seriously though, great article. Well written, sourced (yes, other sources can be used too, but the ones in this article look like WP:RS to me), and professional layout. Links check out and image copyright looks good. My only suggestion would be to find a way to move the ==Bioluminescence== section up since I, at least, found that section to be the most interesting and has the best images. The sequence image is especially amazing! --mav (Urgent FACs/FARs) 01:04, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your support. Those pics are pretty nice, and helped motivate me to write the article. I have an image bias: if I can't find nice pics, I usually won't bother writing an article about a species. When I saw those photos, this was an easy choice. I effectively moved the bioluminescence section up slightly by adding a bioremediation section after it :) Sasata (talk) 06:11, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Support despite the revolting shade of green when they bioluminesce. Another polished article from a seasoned fungus man (no Raymond Briggs ref intended)  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  07:08, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Support (moral or otherwise as WP:Fungi member) - this one has gelled together really nicely actually. Well done. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:34, 6 February 2010 (UTC)


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