Talk:Coscinodon lawianus

Coscinodon lawianus has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 4, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Did you know nomination

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that Coscinodon lawianus is one of only two species of moss endemic to continental Antarctica?

Source: Ochyra, Ryszard; Smith, Ronald Ian Lewis; Bednarek-Ochyra, Halina (2008). Illustrated Moss Flora of Antarctica. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521814027. p. 46

Rehman, Wahid Ul; Gupta, Kriti; Bast, Felix (2021). "Morphophylogenetic Assessment of a New Moss Species Bryum bharatiense sp. nov. (Bryaceae) from Larsemann Hills, Eastern Antarctica". Journal of Asia-Paciﬁc Biodiversity. 14: 283–289. doi:10.1016/j.japb.2021.07.001. pp. 288–289

- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Mark IV (software)

Created by Generalissima (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 100 past nominations.

Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 04:29, 4 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Page was promoted to GA recently enough. Sourcing is good and reliable. Page is long enough. QPQ is done. Hook is interesting and it's nice to have a hook about an underappreciated subject like moss. Personally I would have the hook say "that can only be found in" rather than "endemic to" just to be more approachable to laymen readers, but other than that, it all looks good to me! Di (they-them) (talk) 20:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Fair point; ALT: ... that Coscinodon lawianus is one of only two species of moss only found in continental Antarctica? Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:56, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - Approved! Di (they-them) (talk) 03:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:41, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Coscinodon lawianus/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Generalissima (talk · contribs) 05:52, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 14:28, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

in honor of Australian National Antarctic Research Expeditions (ANARE) director Philip G. Law, the director of the Australian Department of External Affairs' Antarctic Division. I expect Law was Australian? ... joking aside, the two very long names, complete with acronym, do seem excessive here; we could just say "Australian Antarctic research director Philip G. Law", for instance.
- Reworded. - G
a diverse and widespread genus of moss which forms a major component of the Antarctic mosses. Suggest you just remove the entire quoted clause as it's nothing to do with 'Classification', or move it to another section.
- Removed. - G
likely a remnant of the diverse Antarctic flora of the Paleogene - is paleoecology, not taxonomy. Whole paragraph should be moved to another section.
- Moved to distribution. - G
I've formatted several links to remove redundancy in the text (minor edits).
- Thank you! - G
one of two species of moss endemic to continental Antarctica - true, but it'd be much easier for readers to grasp the significance of this if you a) explained what endemic means, and b) added that there are around 70 species of moss in Antarctica, all but those 2 species also found outside Antarctica. Otherwise readers will suppose there are exactly 2 species on the continent, which is false.
- Good idea, reworded. - G
I did a very minor bit of copy-editing to remove a wrongly-formatted generic name that wasn't needed anyway.

Images

Lead image and preserved specimen image: I visited the 'Grimmias of the World' website, was unable to find the CC-by-SA license there. Where is the license releasing the images? A link specifically to the website's license page should be added to the Commons pages for both images.
- Oof, good catch. I just saw these on commons and used them; guess that's a reminder to double-check! Removed these images. -G
Actually I'm not certain of this image either, but it is at least imaginable that Diorit, a geologist, did visit Antarctica back in 1994 and then scanned and uploaded the image in 2011.

Sources

Ochyra 2004 ok.
Rehman 2021 ok.
Skotnicki 2012 part confirmed, rest AGF.

Summary

There's not much that needs doing in this short article, but a small amount of clarification and reorganisation would be helpful. The image licensing question is important. I expect to see this at GA very soon once that has been done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:04, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Chiswick Chap: I think I got to everything! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 18:12, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, all good. It's a GA. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:41, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.