Talk:Tylopilus plumbeoviolaceus/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Rcej (Robert) - talk 07:05, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well... we've got a few things to do :) Currently; the lead needs a mention of the bioactive compounds. In Taxonomy, this paragraph leaves me a few unanswered questions:

"The species was first named as Boletus felleus forma plumbeoviolaceus by American mycologists Walter H. Snell and Esther A. Dick in 1936, based on specimens found in Cornwall, New York. The specific name "plumbeoviolaceus" is coined from the Latin adjectives plumbeus ("leaden" or "lead-coloured") and violaceus ("purple"). The first collections made of the mushroom were immature specimens; a few years later, the authors were able to find mature fruit bodies and determined that the spores and other physical characteristics set it apart as a species distinct from B. felleus, so in 1941 they raised it to species status with the name Boletus plumbeoviolaceus. Noted Agaricales taxonomist Rolf Singer later transferred the taxon to the genus Tylopilus in 1947."

I'll disect sentences out, then ask:

1. "The species was first named as Boletus felleus forma plumbeoviolaceus by American mycologists Walter H. Snell and Esther A. Dick in 1936, based on specimens found in Cornwall, New York."

Q: ~~What about these specimens triggered the usage of "forma"?~~ (that may be off-track)

2. "...a few years later, the authors were able to find mature fruit bodies and determined that the spores and other physical characteristics set it apart as a species distinct from B. felleus, so in 1941 they raised it to species status with the name Boletus plumbeoviolaceus.

Q: What about immaturity or maturity were delineating factors?

3. "Noted Agaricales taxonomist Rolf Singer later transferred the taxon to the genus Tylopilus in 1947."

Q: Why? What entails Boletus vs Tylopilus? Rcej (Robert) - talk 07:05, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These are all very good questions, and I hope I have addressed them satisfactorily with this edit. Sasata (talk) 08:28, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's very nice!! Next; I thought I had spotted an inconsistency in Similar species, but I actually misread a sentence and was mistaken... so it is a non-issue. But, I do have one minor query on this sentence from that section:

"There are few other species that might be confused with Tylopilus plumbeoviolaceus; according to one source, it "is one of the most remarkable and easily identified boletes in the USA."" (Kibby 1994)

Why is he calling Tylopilus plumb. a bolete? heh. Rcej (Robert) - talk 04:08, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A bolete is a general term for any mushroom type with a cap and pores; it is distinguished from the genus Boletus. I've tweaked the lead a bit to hopefully reduce ambiguity. Sasata (talk) 04:20, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good. Another wrap. Rcej (Robert) - talk 04:43, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for another review! Sasata (talk) 05:58, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Results of review

GA review (see here for criteria)

The article Tylopilus plumbeoviolaceus passes this review, and has been upgraded to good article status. The article is found by the reviewing editor to be deserving of good article status based on the following criteria:

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail: Pass