 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Record sizes edit
The cited record sizes needs some verification and/or reliable sources. As only one picture of the recor fungus exist and apparently no independent, reliable sources, it may be a hoax. There are a number of giant shroom hoaxes on the net - this one however differs by being "believable". --Honymand (talk) 21:41, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
- Agreed that we need to go over the article yes. Just expanding something else and will take a look. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:13, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Honymand: the monograph on the genus lists 100 cm as max cap diameter, and the blog seems to confirm, but is a blog. Still have removed uncited stuff.Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:08, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Casliber: You are right! I see the given sizes are probably OK, and I found this as well: http://mushroom.pro/b_spc/spc_pages/big_mushroom.php. Still puzzles me though, that there are so few scientific sources on these finds. I mean on "highest tree" you can find lots of very reliable sources - maybe mushrooms more often go under the radar in the media. --Honymand (talk) 07:31, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Honymand: the monograph on the genus lists 100 cm as max cap diameter, and the blog seems to confirm, but is a blog. Still have removed uncited stuff.Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:08, 7 January 2018 (UTC)