Talk:Aschersonia aleyrodis

A fact from Aschersonia aleyrodis appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 2 August 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the fungal pathogen Aschersonia aleyrodis can control silverleaf whitefly under greenhouse conditions?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/August. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Aschersonia aleyrodis.

Wikipedia

Fungi Low‑importance

	Fungi portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fungi, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fungi on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FungiWikipedia:WikiProject FungiTemplate:WikiProject FungiFungi articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Desertarun (talk) 09:55, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the fungal pathogen Aschersonia aleyrodis can control silverleaf whitefly under greenhouse conditions? Source: "The study demonstrated that A. aleyrodis isolate A005 is an effective biocontrol agent for B. tabaci control under laboratory and greenhouse conditions."

Reviewed: Ian Board

Created by Cwmhiraeth (talk). Self-nominated at 08:47, 18 July 2021 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: - Offline/paywalled citation accepted in good faith Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall:

Article is new enough and long enough. The hook is very interesting because of its misleading implications. Assuming good faith on offline or paywalled academic sources. QPQ has been done, and all looks good. BuySomeApples (talk) 21:24, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IAmNitpicking (talk)

As I wrote in my edit description, the "Description" section is mostly just undefined technical vocabulary. "Stroma" (to me as a zoology major) indicates connective tissue. I'm assuming here it's a specific term in mycology, but that usage is not documented on Wikipedia if so. Some of the terms are links, but ....

Also, maybe a drawing or photo would make the otherwise-nebulous description more useful.

Finally (and not related to being too technical), lots of things are missing here, such as, oh, ecology, reproduction, life cycle, economic importance. Should this article be reclassified as a stub? IAmNitpicking (talk) 14:12, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@IAmNitpicking: I have removed your tag from the article because I think it is a pity to permanently disfigure an article with a tag of this sort. If you can find a source for a more simple description or a suitable image, please add them to the article. I wrote the article because I thought the pathogen was interesting but the sort of details you would like, in non-technical terms, are not readily available. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:42, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Disfigure"? "Permanently"? What is the purpose of an encyclopedia? IAmNitpicking (talk) 10:35, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]