Talk:Lactarius argillaceifolius

Lactarius argillaceifolius 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
June 8, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

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

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that "milkcaps" can be orange (pictured), bright yellow, golden, woolly, downy, northern, sticky, smoky, velvety, deceptive, or vulgar?

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Ucucha 17:11, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be reviewing this article. Ucucha 17:11, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The type specimens—collected by Smith from Oak Grove, Livingston County, Michigan, in July of 1972—is housed at the University of Michigan conservatum."—plural or singular? Also, is "conservatum" a word? It's not in the OED.

It's from the source, but I failed to translate from Latin! :) Changed to herbarium (and pluralized). Sasata (talk) 18:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure it should be plural? The source says "specimen typicum", not "specimina typica". Ucucha 18:58, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to singular... I was confused by another holding in the U of M database that pictured two paratypes. Sasata (talk) 19:16, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"This related grouping of species,"—"This grouping of related species"? Or perhaps just "This grouping"

Changed to the former. Sasata (talk) 18:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Lactarius argillaceifolius var. megacarpus has caps with dimensions from 14 to 27 cm (5.5 to 10.6 in) wide, with acrid-tasting flesh that is up to 3 cm (1.2 in) thick. The gill attachment is adnate"—no citation; looks like you left off in the middle of a sentence, perhaps to write the subsection on varieties a few paragraphs down.

Yes, that's what happened. I removed this unfinished bit, but added a few more details in the "Varieties" subsection. Sasata (talk) 18:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise looking good—as usual. Ucucha 17:22, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick review! Sasata (talk) 18:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the fixes; I'm passing the article now. Ucucha 19:22, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]