Talk:Piperia yadonii

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Piperia yadonii is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to plants and botany. For more information, visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Piperia yadonii was a good article, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Delisted version: April 21, 2007

	This article is part of WikiProject California, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

An entry from Piperia yadonii appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on November 9, 2006.

[edit] Nominate for GA status

Article is well written, has satisfactory images, well organized, stable, well sourced, NPOV and is usable. Architectsf 18:16, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

1. Well written
   1. Compelling and comprehensible prose: The prose is occasionally somewhat unencyclopedic. In the first paragraph, Yadon's rein orchid should appear with the other names in the first sentence. In the first paragraph of the "Description" section, comparisons with other orchids are overwhelming: "Along with most other orchids," "Like other orchids," "As a further shared attribute shared with practically all other orchids." These should be reduced down so that all the characteristics described depend on a single comparison. In "Reproduction and symbiosis", strike ", of course".
   2. Follows a logical structure: The arrangement of sections is somewhat haphazard. "Reproduction and symbiosis" should probably be folded into "Description"; it expands on the contents of the third paragraph of the latter section. The next two sections should perhaps be combined into a single "Distribution and Habitat" section, as the topics go hand-in-hand (IMO). Indeed, parts of "Habitat" repeat information on the distribution.
   3. Follows WP MOS: the taxobox should indicate its endangered status; there's a built-in parameter for it. The species name should never be capitalized, and botanical names should always be italicized. On the other hand, "Piperia" should not be italicized in a common name. Please also use consistent capitalization. Y. Piperia in the "Habitat" section should be changed to P. yadonii. Numbers followed by units or years followed by "BC" should be connected by a non-breaking space ( ), e.g., 20 centimeters. Also, the genus is usually linked in the infobox; perhaps the second paragraph of "Description" might provide material for a stub article on Piperia.
   4. Jargon explained or wikilinked: Sympatric should be wikilinked."Carbon fixed" should be linked to carbon fixation, "Monterey submarine canyon" to Monterey Canyon., and "senesced" to senescence.
2. Accurate and verifiable: No apparent problems
3. Broad in coverage: No apparent problems
4. NPOV: No apparent problems
5. Stable: Yes
6. Images: Yes

Please fix the above problems and I would be happy to approve it for good article status. (And please don't feel slighted; I'm a fairly strict reviewer.) Choess 03:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your excellent and thorough analysis of this article Choess. I have endeavored to fix all items you mentioned with the exception of keeping "description" and "reproduction" sections" separate, which separation i think works well. I have also created the stub Piperia following your good suggestion. Let me know your thoughts. Regards. Anlace 16:44, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks good to me. The section merger is largely a question of taste, so no problem. Choess 17:23, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Geology

This section is poorly written, and does not make sense. I have removed it in its entirety. Please check references, and write the geology in geological terms and the soils in soil terms, and read the references to understand what is wrong.

Yadon’s Piperia prefers sandy soils or even sandstone outcrops. These geological structures are typically on ancient marine terraces^[1] and underlain by clay hardpan. This wild orchid is typically found above bedrock of decomposed granite in soils that are acidic and highly leached. The organism’s geographic distribution is along the coastal region of Monterey County, California, although it does not occur above 150 meters in elevation. Piperia yadonii is normally found within about six miles from the Pacific Ocean, in a climate that is marine driven.

I can't find anything in the Jepson Manual that leads to this conclusion that "sandy soils and sandstone outcrops" are "typically on ancient marine terraces underlain by clay harpan" and that this soil profile is found on "bedrock of decomposed granite." If the bedrock is decomposed granite, or grus, it's not bedrock, but rather the C-horizon, at the very least, as bedrock is the unweathered rock, please look it up. I have to remove this article from GA status, as all of the sources should be checked and inaccurate information removed. KP Botany 02:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC)