Talk:Crinipellis zonata

Crinipellis zonata has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 10, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on August 20, 2010.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that though easily overlooked as a little brown mushroom, Crinipellis zonata (pictured) is covered in distinctive brown hairs?

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Crinipellis zonata/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ucucha 16:49, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the distinctive hair covering inconsistent with being a "little brown mushroom", which is supposed to lack distinctive characters?

Generally, yes, but of course since there's no taxonomic definition of the term, its application depends on who's using it. Kuo is the one who called it an LBM, and the article attributes the usage of the term to him. Sasata (talk) 17:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't attribute it explicitly, though. Not sure whether that is necessary. Ucucha 17:48, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the entire distribution is pretty much in "eastern North America", can you be more specific about the distribution of the variety cremoricolor?

Unfortunately, no. I don't have full access to the Scott Redhead paper where he named the variety (just a snippet on Google Books), and the source I used for distribution of this variety just gives eastern NA. (I did add the type location though) Sasata (talk) 17:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(This might have been covered in some FAC or another.) What makes RogersMushrooms and Fungi on Wood reliable sources?

The Roger's site was covered here; Emberger is a PhD in Botany and Professor at Messiah College (see here), and I think his page is good enough to cite for common names, at least at the GA level. Sasata (talk) 17:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Both seem in accordance with WP:SPS in that case. Ucucha 17:48, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise looking good. Nothing in Web of Knowledge, and the article is accordingly short. Ucucha 16:49, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the fixes; I'll now pass the article. Ucucha 17:48, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick review! Sasata (talk) 17:24, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]