Talk:Xanthoria parietina/GA1

GA review

Passed. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:37, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Nominator: Esculenta (talk · contribs) 14:36, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 14:03, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reading & reviewing! Will work on this over the next couple of days. Esculenta (talk) 20:35, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I've done a very little copy-editing.

Genetic studies reveal high diversity... - well, this is one notch less awful than "Studies reveal" but still journalese; all we need here is "The species is highly diverse ..."

There's another instance of the "Genetic studies reveal" meme in Population genetics. Exterminate!

And there's a rare specimen of a sounds-solid-but-isn't phrase Research has verified that - drop the whole thing, better without.

an invaluable bioindicator - drop the adjective.

astrobiology research, where experiments demonstrate its ability to survive - again, "In astrobiology research, it can survive..." and for the same reason.

a long taxonomic history dating back to Carl Linnaeus, - too rhetorical for Wikipedia. "Its taxonomy begins with Linnaeus" is enough.

Along with the approximately 90 lichens he included in Species Plantarum, it was among the first lichens - "It was one of the lichens he described in Species Plantarum" is all that's needed here.

with the suffix oria, - this needs a word or two of translation or gloss.

There is some overlap between the Habitat and the Ecology sections, with repeated discussion of nitrophily. This is exacerbated by a third section, Nitrogen accumulation, which is, er, geographically isolated from the other two. Not sure of the best solution but the effect on the reader (if anyone other than reviewers reads whole articles) is repeated jolts of déjà vu.

The same issue arises with Biomonitoring, which has its own section but is also discussed quite substantially in Ecology, and repeatedly in Nitrogen accumulation.

Better say that Storfosna island is in Norway.

It employs apoplastic immobilization, - this needs linking and probably glossing, as both words are somewhat unusual (and the "employs" introduction isn't ideal either). Better would be "It immobilizes metals by ... {explanation} ..."

higher tolerance for A and B and greater sensitivity to C and D - if as it seems these two expressions are just "more" and "less" it would be better not to use different terms for the same thing. We could say "Its tolerance is higher for A and B, lower for C and D", for example.

has been used in various traditional medical practices historically. In Andalucia, - wording needs to be tidied up.

a crucial mordant - lose the adjective.

Are we sure that it's correct to say a mordant does more than fixing? Enhancing color seems like a different function? Maybe that's called a colorant or auxochrome or something of that sort?

Richardson conducted pioneering transplant experiments ... that helped - how about "Richardson's transplant experiments helped ..."?

First paragraph of Ecology should mention and wikilink phenotypic plasticity somewhere.

Last paragraph of Ecology should wikilink guano.

Images

The Wayside & Woodland image is not uninteresting, but the taxonomy chapter would do much better with the lectotype, or for that matter a photo of the two SP 25 specimens. The book's title should be in title case, btw.

The thallus colour array is a pleasure, and the right side of the OR line too. The lichenicolous fungi and the Mars experiment are terrific too. I've rarely or never seen such good illustrations for a species article.

It's a shame that the snail image isn't on the right species (not a showstopper).

There are many images of the top surface but (pace the medulla photo) we're lacking a cross-section.
- Thanks for adding micrographs. The VS of the apothecium does show the cross-sectional structure of the thallus in the hypothecium ... it might be worth labelling cortex, medulla, symbionts there. Or you might find a thallus VS, of course!

Good idea about the labelling, I'll certainly do so before eventually submitting for FAC. Will keep eyes open for thallus section. Esculenta (talk) 00:01, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All the images seem to be correctly licensed on Commons.

Sources

All the sources are research articles or historic books, and all are evidently highly relevant.

[69] has DOI 10.1017/S0024282907006780 which gives full access.

Spot-checks: [1], [2], [12], [69], [82], [129].

Summary

OK, this is a fine and remarkably detailed article on a common and very familiar species (I realise I knew about its colour variations, use as biomonitor, and love of farmyard nitrogen...), with excellent illustrations. I've noted a bit of copy-editing needed. Then it'll be a very welcome GA. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:30, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your helpful review. I've taken on board all of your suggestions, including reorganizing and consolidating repeated info (my excuse for missing stuff is lichen articles aren't usually this long!) Agree with including an image of a holotype or other historical specimens, but limited to what I can find for now. My changes are summarized here. Esculenta (talk) 00:01, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.