Talk:Spot test (lichen)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: AryKun (talk · contribs) 19:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

• I'd link function group at first mention, lots of people will have forgotten high school Ochem.

• Done. Esculenta (talk) 14:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

• "include Cladonia portentosa, which is C+ (yellow)" You don't mention yellow reactions to the C test earlier though, only red, orange-rose, and emerald-green.

• Good point. I moved C. portentosa up as a example of an uncommon colour result, and replaced it with another common species with a more common colour result. Esculenta (talk)

• You forgot to italicize para-phenylendiamine in the last paragraph (pun unintended).

• Fixed. Esculenta (talk) 14:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

• "the yellowish colour results from the fluorescence of lichexanthone" Should be cited.

• Done. Esculenta (talk) 14:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

• Images are fine.
• Refs are reliable and properly formatted.
• Excellent work, barely even found anything to quibble about. I'll see which sources I can get my hands on and pass after spot-checking. AryKun (talk) 10:39, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks very much for taking on this review and the others. Am dealing with the brunt of a massive snowstorm, and will get to responses later when I'm done shovelling ... Esculenta (talk) 01:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

  Ok, fixes are made per here. Esculenta (talk) 14:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

• Spot-checked a couple of journal articles cited and found no issues; will pass. AryKun (talk) 12:59, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed