Talk:Penstemon gentianoides

GA Review

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:Penstemon gentianoides/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Fritzmann2002 (talk · contribs) 01:19, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 01:42, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Glad to see another one of your flower articles. Comments:

• Yis a species of flowering plant in the family Plantaginaceae. – consider adding "the plantain family" to help the reader a bit.
• Ylink perennial in lead
• YConsider briefly mention where this plant is distributed earlier in the lead, maybe in the first sentence. In my opinion, this is the most important information a reader wants to know, apart from the family.
• Y in Pinus hartwegii forests – consider changing to the common name and have the scientific name in brackets
• Ylink "phytochemical" and "folk medicine" in lead
• YThe endothelial tissue of P. gentianoides has many organelles and has characteristics that are similar to some species in the family Scrophulariaceae; however, its cuticle layer is much thicker. – As a reader, I don't really know what to do with this information. I don't know what the significance of this is, and in order to actually understand it I would need more context. I suggest to either provide the context or to delete it.
• Yis shaped like a thyrse, – But "thyrse" is already a plant term? So is it a thyrse, or is it not?
• Yand can lack hairs or have them just along the edges – "either" instead of "can"?
• Yabout 3 centimeters. – should be abbreviated for consistency with the rest of the article.
• Y'strong median ridges – replace "median" with "inner" or link the term.
• Yovaries, style – link
• Consider providing conversions for measurements (use the cvt template, e.g. {{cvt|3|to|4|cm}} or {{cvt|4|cm}})

• Since it is a scientific article on a plant not native to anywhere that uses imperial, I'm going to stick to metric. I find the conversions greatly clutter the description section.

• The "Chemistry" sections seems a bit lacking. Maybe explain the significance of the new compound found? Why is this new iridoid unusual, as the paper says?

• If I am completely honest, I can't broach the paper. I re-read it and could not find any plain language discussion on why the new compound is irregular. I'm sure it has chemical quirks that make it so, but I think those are much more in-depth than the scope of this article. Perhaps if the redlink on pensteminoside were created, they could be discussed there. I added a small sentence on iridoids in general.

• YWhy is the common name "gentian-leaved Penstemon" not mentioned in the lead? Is it much rarer than the other one?

• I found it to be so, but I've added it to the lead since that is probably best practice

• YPoiret designated the type locality of Penstemon gentianoides as being near Tolú in Colombia. – He designated a locality near Tolú as the type locality, rather, right?
• Yincluding Selasphorus platycercus – for birds especially, we always use common names. But it does not hurt to provide the scientific name in addition.
• YIts flowers have a primarily hymenopteran pollination syndrome, – consider explaining what this means.
• YOther folk medicine applications for the plant include as an – grammar
• Its modern distribution encompasses Guatemala, Honduras, and all but the northwest of Mexico. – This reads as if the distribution has changed. Is this really the case?

• Well, the distribution Kunth gave in the 19th century included Colombia, as indicated by his designation of the type locality. However, POWO and other modern databases only give Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico as the distribution.

• Ok, but "modern distribution" still suggests it went extinct in Colombia, which, it seems, it not supported by the sources. I guess you just don't have a source that discusses this issue? If so, you could just write "However, according to modern sources, its distribution encompasses …" or similar to solve this ambiguity. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:29, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

• Article seems to cover all major aspects, which is all what is needed for GA, but it is on the short side and the sources seem to have more interesting information (such as different hummingbird pollinators at different altitudes) that could be added. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 01:42, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Jens Lallensack, I believe I have addressed everything, unless you believe the broadness criterion has not been met in which case I am happy to look for additional information to add. Fritzmann (message me) 19:18, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Jens Lallensack, I changed the wording per your advice and attributed the distribution specifically to Plants of the World Online. Fritzmann (message me) 12:13, 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.