Talk:Haematomma ochroleucum
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Theleekycauldron in topic Did you know nomination
 | A fact from Haematomma ochroleucum appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 14 October 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
Did you know nomination
edit- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 00:34, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
( )
Haematomma ochroleucum var. porphyrium
- ... that the lichen Haematomma ochroleucum comes in two colour forms, depending on whether or not it produces usnic acid? Source: Fryday, Alan & Coppins, Brian (July 1997). "Keys to Sterile, Crustose Saxicolous and Terricolous Lichens Occuring in the British Isles". Lichenologist. 29 (4): 301–332. doi:10.1006/lich.1997.0080. S2CID 85647115.
- ALT1: ... that the yellow bloodstain lichen might not be yellow? Source: Fryday, Alan & Coppins, Brian (July 1997). "Keys to Sterile, Crustose Saxicolous and Terricolous Lichens Occuring in the British Isles". Lichenologist. 29 (4): 301–332. doi:10.1006/lich.1997.0080. S2CID 85647115.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Silvia Bottini
- Comment: Yes, it's another old review. I still have a stack of them!
Moved to mainspace by MeegsC (talk). Self-nominated at 12:20, 24 September 2022 (UTC).
- Starting Review--Kevmin § 14:49, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
Article long enough, and move to main space in the right timeframe. Article is cited to reliable sources, and neutral in prose. The hooks are cited and verified with the sources. No policy issues or copyvios identified. Looks good to go.--Kevmin § 14:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
