Talk:Ludwig Schaerer

Ludwig Schaerer 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.
Review: June 4, 2022. (Reviewed version).

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Fungi: Lichens Low‑importance

	Fungi portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Lichen task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Switzerland Low‑importance

	Switzerland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Switzerland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Switzerland 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.SwitzerlandWikipedia:WikiProject SwitzerlandTemplate:WikiProject SwitzerlandSwitzerland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: AryKun (talk · contribs) 11:07, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Latin, German, and French phrases should be in lang templates.
- Done. Esculenta (talk) 15:14, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Very, very sorry for the delay in reviewing this.
"history at a young" → should be " history from a young"
"Already at a young age" → Should be "from a young age" here as well.
Link cryptogams.
"time–flaws" → Spaced en-dash instead?
"Taxon's" → The link here is wrong.
The images are all correctly licensed and appropriately used.
References are reliable and support the claims made.
No other issues I can see. AryKun (talk) 07:46, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've made all the tweaks as suggested. Thanks for having a look! Esculenta (talk) 14:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No other issues I can see, so will be passing. AryKun (talk) 04:43, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]