Talk:Russula emetica

Toxic?

Hi! Here in Russia it is considered a very edible mushroom and I myself eat it many times. It is calleed 'syroyezhka' ('raw-eater') here which means it can be eaten raw.--MathFacts (talk) 00:25, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

The article says "it used to be widely eaten in Russia and eastern European countries" and perhaps it still is, and that information is inaccurate, but wikipedia shouldn't be changed without a source that meets its requirememts.... The first sentance has been changed. It used to say the mushroom was called the "sickener" (as on the wikipedia main page) and now it says the "fisher." Later on (Toxicity) it refers to it as the "sickener" again. What's this about? 72.179.53.2 (talk) 19:28, 28 November 2012 (UTC) Eric

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Russula emetica/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Rcej (talk · contribs) 07:22, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Fine job :) Two things:

• the lead mentions that cooking curtails the toxicity; the section in the article doesn't. Also, the fine line between toxic and edible reads a little wishy-washy. hmm How does cooking chemically affect the toxin?
• The images in similar species are more prominent than the main img. Maybe shrinko! Rcej (Robert) – talk 11:38, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

• I've made some changes and additions that will hopefully address your concerns. We're not really sure how cooking affects the toxins; David Arora says "Parboiling may destroy the toxins", but I've used a more recent source that says parboiling removes most of the toxins (which seems most likely to me). I shrunk the lookalike images (and added another) so that the protagonist is most prominent in the article. Thanks for reviewing, and let me know if there's anything else you can think of to make this article better (will probably send to FAC sometime). Sasata (talk) 20:46, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

• Much better! I can't think of anything ;) Rcej (Robert) – talk 09:41, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Results of review

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

The article Russula emetica passes this review, and has been promoted to good article status. The article is found by the reviewing editor to be deserving of good article status based on the following criteria:

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: Pass

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Russula emetica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130302235323/http://www.plantlife.org.uk/uploads/documents/recommended-english-names-for-fungi.pdf to http://www.plantlife.org.uk/uploads/documents/recommended-english-names-for-fungi.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110606015228/http://www.mtsn.tn.it/russulales-news/singer_1986.asp to http://www.mtsn.tn.it/russulales-news/singer_1986.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:28, 20 May 2017 (UTC)