Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Psilocybe semilanceata/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 Laser brain 03:55, 31 January 2011.

Psilocybe semilanceata

 * Nominator(s): Sasata (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Psilocybe semilanceata is, according to the world's foremost authority on psychedelic mushrooms, the most common psilocybin-containing mushroom, so I figured Wikipedia should have a decent page about the species. I have tweaked the article to the point of diminishing returns, and think it's ready for FAC. Sasata (talk) 17:32, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments Oh, look. I return to FAC source checks and there is a mushroom! I'm shocked, shocked I tell you! I need to get you to do more reviews so you'll quite catching up to me...
 * Both http://www.cybertruffle.org.uk/ pages timed out on me. Not sure if it's my connection or a problem with the site.
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. I ran the article through Coren's tool and Earwig's tool and nothing showed up in regards to plagiarism with those tools. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:49, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking, Ealdgyth. The cybertruffle site times out for me sometimes during the day, but I usually don't have problems when I connect at night. I promise to submit to FAC this year an article that's not about a mushroom! Sasata (talk) 17:59, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Let me guess: a yeast? Ucucha 20:50, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * A mycologist! J Milburn (talk) 03:28, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not so one-dimensional in real life (no, really). It'll be something completely different, I swear! Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a chess player if we ever get off our lazy asses... --Cryptic C62 · Talk 03:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Try a battleship. You won't regret it, I promise. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:25, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments:
 * Do the parentheses with the variety names mean that they were described in a different genus?
 * Nope; I rearranged this part so I could list the authorities and years in conventional ICBN format without intruding into the prose too much. Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Do you have the Greek-alphabet forms of the Greek words? The word for "bald" is likely psilos (ψιλος), not psilo.
 * Yes, you're correct; I added the Greek letters (lifted from the article Psilocybe cubensis), I will update when I can cite to a RS. Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Have now cited Greek spelling and etymology to the OED online. Sasata (talk) 05:50, 14 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Explain what an anamorphic form is.
 * Done. Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Among the similar species, how do mexicana and samuiensis differ morphologically from semilanceata? Also, for Cortinarius rubellus, could you be more explicit about the differences with P. semilanceata?
 * Done. Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * "In North America, the mushroom is known throughout Canada, where it has been collected from British Columbia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Quebec."—that's an odd definition of "throughout".
 * True... changed to "collected from provinces bordering oceans: ..." Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * "In the United States, it is most common in the Pacific Northwest, west of the Cascade Mountains, where it fruits in autumn and early winter; fruiting also occurs along coastal regions of Washington and Oregon during spring months."—not quite sure what you're getting at here; the Pacific Northwest west of the Cascades is the same place as coastal Washington and Oregon, I'd think.
 * Oops, meant to indicate that the former was common and the latter much less so, now added. Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I assume the consumption of this fungus has certain legal consequences in at least some countries. I see there is a "See also" link to an article on the legal status of psilocybin mushrooms in general, but is there no specific information on this species? Also, are there any addictive effects known?
 * There isn't anything specific to this species that couldn't also be added to the 200-ish other psychedelic mushrooms, so I decided not to put anything more about that than the See also links. Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Any phylogenetic information about the most closely related species?
 * To my knowledge, there haven't been any good molecular studies that have focussed specifically on defining the phylogenetic relationships within Psilocybe. A couple of publications have used P. semilanceata as a canonical Psilocybe in the context of a large-scale analysis to clarify familial or ordinal relationships within Agaricales/Agaricomycetes. The only other real candidate is a pub from 2004 that got ambiguous results, and wasn't even really about phylogeny (more about finding a way to use PCR for rapid detection of hallucinogenic mushrooms). So I didn't include it. Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * "Saccardo PA. (1887). Sylloge Hymenomycetum, Vol. I. Agaricineæ. 5. Patavii. p. 1051."—what is "Patavii"? Padua?
 * Some Googling reveals that you are correct; changed. Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * "It is found throughout the cool temperate and subarctic regions of the Northern Hemisphere" (from the lead)—you don't mention it occurring in Asia in the body.
 * Changed "throughout" to "widely distributed" to be less inclusive. Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

The prose is good, and the article appears pretty comprehensive—as usual. I'll have a look through the long list of Web of Science results. Ucucha 20:55, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks much Ucucha. Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Disambig/External Link check - no dabs or dead external links. -- Pres N  21:19, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Support. Yes! I was looking forward to this coming here, it's definitely a species worthy of a featured article in terms of importance. Taking a read through.
 * FAC Delegate: J Milburn's resolved comments moved to talk. Sasata (talk) 15:07, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Pretty fantastic article. Brilliant research. Good luck! J Milburn (talk) 01:02, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for a detailed review JM! Sasata (talk) 05:31, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Willing to trust your judgement where our opinions differ. Happy to support. Lovely and important article, definitely worthy of FA status. J Milburn (talk) 11:33, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Support from SmartSE (talk) 13:48, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * FAC Delegate: SmartSE's resolved comments moved to archive talk. Sasata (talk) 15:07, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Can't see any more problems, so I will support for the first time ever. SmartSE (talk) 10:48, 11 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your comments and support, J Milburn and SmartSE (and glad to have broken your "support virginity", SmartSE); I have taken the liberty of moving the resolved comments to the archive talk, as collapsible boxes should be avoided at FAC (see under "Supporting and opposing" in the instructions). Sasata (talk) 15:07, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments. Hey mate! Happy to see that you're still churning out mushroom articles. I intend to do a prose review to try to perfect the readability of the article (what is a "destabilizing name change"?), and perhaps a literature search to make more work for you :P. One quick structural comment: Regarding the phrase "The legal status of psilocybin mushrooms varies worldwide.", it seems odd to me that the section only gives two examples of national legal statuses. Surely there are other countries worth mentioning, no? --Cryptic C62 · Talk 03:49, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Some revenge reviewing? I look forward to it! I'll see what I can do about the legality section... on the one hand I don't want to expand this too much, as it's best left to the main article, but now that you point it out, yeah its Anglo-centric the way it is now. Will fix soon. Sasata (talk) 05:17, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I've now mentioned the general European ban ending with The Netherlands in 2008. Sasata (talk) 02:18, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * A quick check with Google Scholar shows several publications about P. semilanceata that aren't used by this article. They seem to be coming from chromatography journals, so here are the results for "psilocybe semilanceata chromatography". I am happy to believe that some of these contain information that is already covered in the intro paragraph for Psychoactive use, though I find it curious that the sentence "Several studies since then support the idea that the variability of psilocybin content in P. semilanceata is low, regardless of country of origin." is followed by a single reference.


 * That brings me to my next point: I find it somewhat disconcerting that the reference Magic Mushrooms Around the World was published by Knockabout Comics. Have you seen their website? This does not seem like the type of company that would be able to put together a rigorous scientific book. While such a publication might be useful for verifying the impact of the mushroom on popular culture, I don't think it should be used for purely scientific claims. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 23:54, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


 * what are you talking about? They've got the Fabulous Furry Freak Brothers, so ... respect. Seriously, I considered this, but thought the author (who's a real scientist, and widely published in "scholarly literature") was more relevant than the publisher. Having said that, let's take a look at what I've cited from this book:
 * "According to German mycologist Jochen Gartz, fruit bodies will fluoresce under the light of a quartz halogen lamp." I have not seen this fact repeated in any of my other research about the species, so I've no problems with chopping this sentence. Sasata (talk) 01:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * "…, which included a description of the fungus, then known as Agaricus glutinosus Curtis." This one has to stay, as it's Gartz's opinion about the synonymy, but I have made this more explicit in the article. Sasata (talk) 01:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * "Several studies since then support the idea that the variability of psilocybin content in P. semilanceata is low, regardless of country of origin." I have kept this citation, as it's a useful summation of the primary literature. I have, however, added an additional note which cites three primary studies with results that corroborate this statement, should the reader wish to verify it for themselves. Sasata (talk) 01:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * "According to Gartz (1995), P. semilanceata is Europe's most popular psychoactive species." This one has to stay, as it's explicitly Gartz's opinion. Sasata (talk) 01:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Regarding the papers I haven't used, I didn't mean for this article to use every publication that mentions the mushroom. Many methods papers use the species as a "canonical hallucinogenic mushroom" because it's relatively easy to obtain, and the psilocybin levels are relatively constant. I think I've done a pretty good job of mentioning the important analytical papers, but am open to suggestions if you see something in particular that you think should be added. Sasata (talk) 01:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * On the one hand, the author of a book is more responsible for its content than the publisher. On the other hand, if this guy is a real scientist, why didn't he work with a real publisher? Regardless, I'm satisfied with your courses of action. I have begun a prose review located here. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 02:28, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I dug into this a bit more, and discovered I had the publisher wrong. I got the publisher info from Amazon (which I usually check so I can copy the isbn before pasting it into diberri's citation template tool), but they have the publisher incorrect ... it's "LIS publications" in Los Angeles, not Knockabout comics in London. Should have just looked in the front cover. Turns out the book is a translation of a 1993 German publication. Sasata (talk) 03:02, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, fancy that. Feel free to revert the changes you made under the assumption that the book was published by Knockabout. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 04:06, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Support - After an efficient and productive prose review, I am quite satisfied with the readability and accessibility of the article's prose. On that basis, I'm happy to lend it my support. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 17:47, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to do this, much appreciated. Sasata (talk) 18:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Support - this was certainly more engaging of an article than I expected. That's a compliment to the author. No problems that I can see. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 10:25, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Ed, glad you liked it. Sasata (talk) 19:31, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Status on Cryptic C62's prose review? -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  02:08, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi, still here! Sorry for the delay, I've had a busy weekend. I'll jump back on the prose review right now. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 02:15, 24 January 2011 (UTC)


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