Talk:Kew Herbarium/GA1
GA Review
[edit]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.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Esculenta (talk · contribs) 17:49, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 13:53, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Comments
[edit]- Heading 'Modern research applications' - could drop the 'Modern'.
suspected novel specimens
- presumably this means "specimens suspected to be of novel species".
- William Arthur Bromfield is overlinked.
- Not convinced we need to link to carbon dioxide immediately after carbon dioxide levels.
Images
[edit]- The images are all from Commons, taken by all the best people (ahem), and correctly licensed.
- You might like to illustrate Psathyrella vs (e.g.) Lacrymaria. Not part of the GA criteria.
- The upright images should be so formatted.
Sources
[edit]- Article is fully cited to reliable sources. Surprisingly only 3 of these are primary.
- Might be wise to repeat [24] for the water lily image caption.
- All the spotchecks I tried came up fine.
Summary
[edit]- There's very little wrong with this as a GA but it may be worth attending to the few items listed above. I hope you'll take the time to review one of my biology or agriculture articles. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:13, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks much for reviewing; I thought it might interest you, considering the excellent illustrative images! I've implemented most of your suggestions (along with some other tweaks) in these edits. Esculenta (talk) 17:29, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
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.