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
"found in moist habitats" doesn't tell us if it grows on the ground, on leaves, on decaying wood, etc.
I've added a note in the second paragraph of the lead.
J Milburn (
talk) 14:31, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
"The stem connects to a large and well-defined "bulb" at the base." Instead of saying it "connects to" (makes me think of it as a separate structure), how about a wording like this: "The base of the stem is a well-defined "bulb""?
Gone for "At the base of the stem is a large and well-defined "bulb"." Better?
J Milburn (
talk) 14:31, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
(funny looking spores) ... "This is perhaps due to poor weather." Poor weather is vague; does this mean dry weather (I think a fungus would think dry weather to be poor). Meh, never mind, the authors are equally vague!
"The tip is encrusted with crystal-like structures and sometimes bends," the tip is encrusted with bends?
for our general audience, you might want to spell out ITS and mention that it's ribosomal DNA. I think that
molecular phylogenetics is a better (more targeted) piped link in this case than
genetic testing
Gone for "[[Molecular phylogenetics|Phylogenetic analysis]] of the respective [[internal transcribed spacer]] sequences has confirmed that it is ''I. obtusiuscula'' and ''I. saliceticola'' are separate species."
J Milburn (
talk) 14:31, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
might be worthwhile to mention that there's been over 150 species of Inocybe found in Scandinavia
Done; however, I've also switched around mentions of "Scandinavia" to "Nordic countries". According to
our article, I was actually using the word wrong...
J Milburn (
talk) 14:31, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Hmmm, did not know that ... now I'll have to find and correct the instances I've used this incorrectly ...
Sasata (
talk) 16:42, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Tried contacting the authors for a pic?
I contacted Ukka Vauras, but I was unable to find contact details for Katri Kokkonen. I also considered drawing my own sketch of the spores, but I wasn't sure whether that would be academically sound, seeing as I'd be basing my sketch off someone else's. What do you think?
I think it'd be ok here, as the original spore pics are simple sketches anyway, so it would be easy to draw them accurately. Would certainly be a useful encyclopaedic addition, seeing as spore shape is a defining characteristic for this species.
Sasata (
talk) 16:42, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Thanks very much for your review; it's late, so I've only picked off some of the easier points, rather than risk messing something up.
J Milburn (
talk) 00:22, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
You're welcome, it's my pleasure. The article meets the GA criteria; passing now. (p.s. I've seen a few more Inocybe pics show up at MO for which we don't have articles, in case you're seeking further fibrecap inspiration.)
Sasata (
talk) 16:42, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Edibility
I think that mushrooms should have a word about edibility or toxicity. Especially if there are toxic species in the genus, while others are rumored to be eaten.
80.254.148.123 (
talk) 08:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Sadly, the sources don't mention it. It's probably poisonous, though almost certainly not deadly.
J Milburn (
talk) 10:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)reply
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
"found in moist habitats" doesn't tell us if it grows on the ground, on leaves, on decaying wood, etc.
I've added a note in the second paragraph of the lead.
J Milburn (
talk) 14:31, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
"The stem connects to a large and well-defined "bulb" at the base." Instead of saying it "connects to" (makes me think of it as a separate structure), how about a wording like this: "The base of the stem is a well-defined "bulb""?
Gone for "At the base of the stem is a large and well-defined "bulb"." Better?
J Milburn (
talk) 14:31, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
(funny looking spores) ... "This is perhaps due to poor weather." Poor weather is vague; does this mean dry weather (I think a fungus would think dry weather to be poor). Meh, never mind, the authors are equally vague!
"The tip is encrusted with crystal-like structures and sometimes bends," the tip is encrusted with bends?
for our general audience, you might want to spell out ITS and mention that it's ribosomal DNA. I think that
molecular phylogenetics is a better (more targeted) piped link in this case than
genetic testing
Gone for "[[Molecular phylogenetics|Phylogenetic analysis]] of the respective [[internal transcribed spacer]] sequences has confirmed that it is ''I. obtusiuscula'' and ''I. saliceticola'' are separate species."
J Milburn (
talk) 14:31, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
might be worthwhile to mention that there's been over 150 species of Inocybe found in Scandinavia
Done; however, I've also switched around mentions of "Scandinavia" to "Nordic countries". According to
our article, I was actually using the word wrong...
J Milburn (
talk) 14:31, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Hmmm, did not know that ... now I'll have to find and correct the instances I've used this incorrectly ...
Sasata (
talk) 16:42, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Tried contacting the authors for a pic?
I contacted Ukka Vauras, but I was unable to find contact details for Katri Kokkonen. I also considered drawing my own sketch of the spores, but I wasn't sure whether that would be academically sound, seeing as I'd be basing my sketch off someone else's. What do you think?
I think it'd be ok here, as the original spore pics are simple sketches anyway, so it would be easy to draw them accurately. Would certainly be a useful encyclopaedic addition, seeing as spore shape is a defining characteristic for this species.
Sasata (
talk) 16:42, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Thanks very much for your review; it's late, so I've only picked off some of the easier points, rather than risk messing something up.
J Milburn (
talk) 00:22, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
You're welcome, it's my pleasure. The article meets the GA criteria; passing now. (p.s. I've seen a few more Inocybe pics show up at MO for which we don't have articles, in case you're seeking further fibrecap inspiration.)
Sasata (
talk) 16:42, 20 June 2012 (UTC)reply
Edibility
I think that mushrooms should have a word about edibility or toxicity. Especially if there are toxic species in the genus, while others are rumored to be eaten.
80.254.148.123 (
talk) 08:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Sadly, the sources don't mention it. It's probably poisonous, though almost certainly not deadly.
J Milburn (
talk) 10:19, 18 April 2013 (UTC)reply