Talk:Banksia aculeata/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: FunkMonk (talk · contribs) 23:57, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll review this article. FunkMonk (talk) 23:57, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Seems a bit scant on images, perhaps this one[1] could be added somewhere?

Yeah...actually I'll have a dig around on my hard drive and see if I can find some more Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:59, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The main issue I find with the article is that there are many uncommon terms that are not explained. The links of course help, but as with other technical articles, I think explaining in parenthesis would be helpful for the layreader...
"Banksia aculeata grows as a bushy shrub" I'm not sure what this means?

Have reworded that, does that help? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:25, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"lacking a lignotuber." Explain?

expanded. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:25, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"the inflorescences are" Explain?

expanded. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:25, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"The infructescence" Likewise?

expanded. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:25, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Oval in shape, the follicles are wrinkled in texture and covered with fine hair, they are 3–4.5 cm" Seems a bit odd, perhaps "and they are"?

Oops, I split to avoid run on 'and'. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:41, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"The obovate seed" Explain?

2D egg-shaped. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:41, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"is composed of the wedge-shaped seed body proper" Not sure what this means?

removed 'proper'. There is the seed body (containing the fertile bit) and a membranous wing. Added that it contains embryonic plant..does that help? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:41, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"cotyledons which" Explain?

expanded like this. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:36, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"and perianths" Explain?

expanded. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:17, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Like many plants in south-west Western Australia" I think this location should be mentioned much earlier, either under taxonomy or habitat.

rejigged. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:16, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"shorter pistils" Explain?

tweaked. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:47, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"It is killed by fire" Perhaps say "this species" or its name, since the preceding sentence is a description of two general types.

tweaked. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:43, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"but in a recent study the pathogen" This pathogen?

tweaked. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:43, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Although it was collected by James Drummond, Banksia aculeata was not formally described until 1981" Perhaps mention the date in the intro, otherwise the significance of the rest of the sentence will be lost on those who don't know when Drummond lived.

Ok, I tried this before changing to this Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:32, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"soil-borne water mould" Only described as such in intro.

added to body Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:32, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Though you haven't commented after all points here, it seems you have addressed all in the article itself? FunkMonk (talk) 18:18, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't rejigged the pistils or perianths yet, and got sidetracked as I have to get a vine to grow on a fence...so was looking at and editing some articles....hang on.... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 19:16, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update - have tried to expand all - let me know what is still tricky. Cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:47, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good now. Did you find some more photos in your archives? FunkMonk (talk) 07:46, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded this one - it is aculeata BUT the follicles should have a more wrinkly surface..so we were both puzzled....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:13, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A banksia cone with huge follicles. Keys out to Banksia aculeata BUT follicles aren't wrinkly but smooth.

Ah, ok, if it's iffy, never mind. If there are no more remarks, I'm ready to pass. FunkMonk (talk) 13:21, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok great/thanks Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 01:59, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Driveby comments from Sainsf: Another hit by Cas Liber. Would like to point out a few things. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 06:02, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In the lead, is not the line It generally grows as a dense shrub up to 2 m (7 ft) tall, has leaves with very prickly serrated margins, and unusual pinkish, pendent (hanging) inflorescences; generally hidden in the foliage, these appear during the early summer rather too long? Could be split?

yes, split Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:02, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think reseeders and resprouters should be in double quotes rather than italics.

See, looking at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Text_formatting#Italic_type and scrolling down to words as words section, I've been following that and using italics. I'd use quote marks if a sentence or phrase Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:02, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

However both the new foliage and the infructescence are considered attractive May smell of original research.

good point - these points were made by George, so I have clarified attribution to him. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:05, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ref. nos. 6 and 8 need not have URLs if they already have DOIs and/or PMIDs.

I did muse on that, but they both link to fulltexts, which are valuable to find... Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:02, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Yes, this is ready to be a GA now. You and FunkMonk have done a great job. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 11:17, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FunkMonk Is the article a GA yet? You said yesterday that it is ready to pass. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 11:18, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, thanks for further comments, will pass now! FunkMonk (talk) 20:54, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]