Wikipedia:Peer review/Holmgrenanthe/archive1

Holmgrenanthe

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…

User:Peter coxhead did a lot of good work on this article about a pretty obscure plant few are likely to ever see, and an article few are likely to ever read. I am starting the WP:GAN process, and the instructions say to first ask for a peer review, so here it is. This is my first time doing this, so please correct any errors I make in doing this.

Thanks, FloraWilde (talk) 21:58, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

A compact, well-written article about an obscure topic. The taxonomy section should explain what genera Pennell and Rothmaler assigned this taxon to, since those synonyms are in the taxobox. I would hyphenate more of the compound adjectives (e.g., low-growing, globe-shaped) but that may be my personal quirk of style. The article is set up in conformity with the WikiProject Plants template and has the sections that are appropriate for this rather esoteric plant. I haven't made a close check against Jepson's Manual to confirm the details of the description, but I presume it's in order. (Arguably, Jepson is more standard and might be a better source than MacKay for morphology; nothing against MacKay for reliability, just that Jepson is a more likely source for people to pick up in general when looking at plant descriptions.)

A few suggestions for improvement above and beyond the call of duty:

• this webpage suggests the largest population is in an unnamed canyon north of Fall Canyon. I'm not sure Mr. Ellis can still be tracked down, but he might be able to shed light on the matter, and whether his findings were ever published in a reliable source, maybe by a California native plant society or something of that sort.
• Are there any publications describing desert limestone cliff communities? Holmgrenanthe isn't the only endemic of this habitat, and some general ecological background on it would fill out the distribution and habitat section a bit.
• There are a number of pictures of this plant online, under both the current and original names. Maybe write to one of the photographers and see if they'll release a photo to Commons? That's probably the single biggest improvement that can be made here; the description was good, but I couldn't quite grasp just what it looked like until I saw a photo. Choess (talk) 20:02, 1 August 2014 (UTC)