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 articles
Fungal GA noms tend to be taken fast, so I'm claiming this one now; I'll provide comments over the next few days.
Ucucha18:29, 6 January 2011 (UTC)reply
It's looking good; I made a few minor changes. You seem to overuse semicolons a little in the description section, though for GA that shouldn't be a problem. Also, why don't you have anything on the phylogenetic analyses the describers carried out?
Ucucha09:18, 7 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the fixes! I didn't include much on the phylogenetic analyses because I'm not actually a scientist, I just pretend to be one on Wikipedia. I read it about five times and I just couldn't understand what was going on. I noted their conclusion (the most closely related species) but the experiment itself was too much. I'll probably revisit it at some point, maybe when I've written a few other articles with that sort of info.
J Milburn (
talk)
11:54, 7 January 2011 (UTC)reply
I've added a little myself; for phylogenetic analyses, it's generally more useful to read the figures than the text. The results don't seem very conclusive. (And I'm also not a scientist, just a pretender.)
Ucucha21:05, 7 January 2011 (UTC)reply
What I find particularly commendable are the brief appositional phrases parsing for the average reader the specialized mycological vocabulary. Worth imitating.--
Wetman (
talk)
15:00, 14 August 2014 (UTC)reply