The article was promoted by Ian Rose 10:02, 30 March 2013 (UTC) [1]. reply
Ramaria botrytis ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
Ramaria botrytis is a widely distributed, common, edible coral fungus. I think the prose and research are up to the standards of other mushroom FAs. Looking forward to your comments, Sasata ( talk) 17:08, 1 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Source review - spotchecks not done
Comments from J Milburn
Some thoughts- feel free not to go ahead with suggestions you don't think are worthwhile.
I've not looked into the sources or the images. Nothing too serious, but I do think the lack of information on the variety is less than ideal. J Milburn ( talk) 22:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Support on the condition that source and image checks come back OK. Seems to cover all the bases, and well written. J Milburn ( talk) 14:02, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Support Comments from Jim Just a few nitpicks
Jimfbleak -
talk to me?
06:50, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
Lead looks good:
-- Cryptic C62 · Talk 20:39, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Comments - Support on prose and comprehensiveness by Cwmhiraeth.
Delegate comment -- almost there, check your duplicate links... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 14:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC) reply
The article was promoted by Ian Rose 10:02, 30 March 2013 (UTC) [1]. reply
Ramaria botrytis ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
Ramaria botrytis is a widely distributed, common, edible coral fungus. I think the prose and research are up to the standards of other mushroom FAs. Looking forward to your comments, Sasata ( talk) 17:08, 1 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Source review - spotchecks not done
Comments from J Milburn
Some thoughts- feel free not to go ahead with suggestions you don't think are worthwhile.
I've not looked into the sources or the images. Nothing too serious, but I do think the lack of information on the variety is less than ideal. J Milburn ( talk) 22:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Support on the condition that source and image checks come back OK. Seems to cover all the bases, and well written. J Milburn ( talk) 14:02, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Support Comments from Jim Just a few nitpicks
Jimfbleak -
talk to me?
06:50, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
reply
Lead looks good:
-- Cryptic C62 · Talk 20:39, 14 March 2013 (UTC) reply
Comments - Support on prose and comprehensiveness by Cwmhiraeth.
Delegate comment -- almost there, check your duplicate links... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 14:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC) reply