Talk:Cortinarius iodes

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 01:25, 30 October 2012 (UTC)

Review

Prose comments

• On Taxonomy:

  Why not merging the second one-line paragraph into the first one?

• The 1st para is about taxonomy and classification, and the next is about nomenclature. They are related, but distinct enough that I prefer to keep this information separate. Ideally I'd like to make that second paragraph longer, but haven't been able to dig up anything else to add to it (yet). Sasata (talk) 03:31, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

• Oh, good explanation. No issues then. Passed.

• Thanks for reviewing! Sasata (talk) 04:56, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 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:
· · ·

— ΛΧΣ21™ 04:39, 4 November 2012 (UTC)