Talk:Paxillus involutus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Paxillus involutus has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment. | |||
|
||||
 |
Paxillus involutus is supported by WikiProject Fungi, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Fungi. Please work to improve this article, or visit our project page to find other ways of helping. |
||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. |
||
| Mid | This article is on a subject of mid-importance within mycology. | ||
|
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
|||
Eddietoran 07:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/nrc/cjc/2003/00000081/00000001/art00012;jsessionid=e4fj8top6bkfn.alice has some info on the components, but not the toxicity, of paxillus involutus. I read "somewhere" that it causes hemolysis.
[edit] bookmark
[1] - gotta run. book mark for later. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 06:45, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Good article nomination on hold
This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write. This is how the article, as of February 23, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?:
Mostly very well-written and MOS compliant, but there a few things that need to be dealt with. First off, the first sentence of the article does not, to someone unfamiliar with the subject, state the obvious well enough. Rather delving immediately in to details about how it was "...previously thought to be edible with some unusual recently-discovered poisonous properties", the first sentence should say something more obvious. Good points to make in the first sentence are things such as, "Paxillus involutus...is a mushroom in the Paxillaceae family of fungi." You could also add where it is found in the first sentence, such as "...is a mushroom in the Paxillaceae family found in...". If you're trying to make sure that notability is stated from the get-go, you might include adjectives such as "well-known", "widespread" or even "rare" etc. The other point that needs addressing is from the lead, where you say that the mushroom was accidentally introduced to some areas. How this introduction occurred is insufficiently explained: it seems that it got carried along with introduced trees, but making this a little more obvious in the applicable section would be helpful.
- (ok, I've tried to tweak the lead a bit)
- 2. Factually accurate?: Overall, you've done a great job with verification. However, as specific numbers such as measurements should be cited directly, I have marked one sentence as needing a cite. In the second place I mark with a fact tag, you assert the opinion of "English guidebooks", apparently(so far as I can tell) without providing at least one reputable English guidebook as an in-line cite.
- 3. Broad in coverage?:
Definitely broad in coverage. - 4. Neutral point of view?: Gives fair representation to all significant points of view.
- 5. Article stability? Obviously stable, no edit wars etc.
- 6. Images?: All images used are accounted for with licenses and sources.
Great work overall. If you have any questions about things I've requested above, please don't hesitate to ask.
Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved. After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again. If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice. Thank you for your work so far. VanTucky 02:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Notes
For readability, please place any comments or questions pertaining to the hold below rather than within the body of the review. Thank you!
