Talk:Psilocybe weraroa

New Zealand Low‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fungi Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Iwi on shrooms

Any reference to entheogenic usage by the Tohunga shaman? Would make a nice Did you know? hook! Sasata (talk) 22:58, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is no recorded or agreed upon history of it. Mycellenz (talk) 12:47, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Growth Sequence

Uploaded a series of photos of the growth sequence

renaming

once I get some other stuff off my plate, I'll be creating Psilocybe weraroa, transferring this content there, and leaving this page as a redirect. Kgorman-ucb (talk) 06:36, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article needs to be moved rather than created under the new name, but a lot of information here needs to be updated and/or better referenced. I wonder why the new name isn't listed in MycoBank or Index Fungorum (even though the authors claim the MycoBank number is given as MB515728?) Sasata (talk) 16:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The name psilocybe weraroa now appears in index fungorum (it was previously present but hidden,) but apparently it has still not been published in a code-compliant fashion (going off of personal correspondence with Paul Kirk for that one - I don't know jack about nomenclature codes.) IF/MB are treating it as a synonym, not a new authoritative name. I will update the article a bit. Kevin (talk) 00:32, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]