This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fungi, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fungi on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FungiWikipedia:WikiProject FungiTemplate:WikiProject FungiFungi articles
This article is part of WikiProject Algae, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the photosynthetic organisms commonly called algae and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AlgaeWikipedia:WikiProject AlgaeTemplate:WikiProject AlgaeAlgae articles
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.
"would later" -- can't see the point of this contorted construction. Either just put things in chronological order and say he did this, he ____ed that, he did the other; or say "He later did this" if out-of-order is absolutely necessary for some reason.
I kept the first of these, because it's a valid and appropriate use of the future in the past tense (it reflects Du Rietz's future actions from a past perspective, encapsulating the anticipation of events that were planned or expected but had not yet occurred at that point in the narrative), but agree that the second instance was not appropriate, and so changed it to "became". Esculenta (talk) 20:51, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What are these "laws of constancy"? Either a wikilink or a gloss, preferably both.
Nothing to do with this review, but I wonder that we don't have a {{Lichenologists}} template to go at the ends of articles like this one. Or maybe {{Swedish lichenologists}}.
"small cryptogams" falls oddly on the ear in the 21st century, more like the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica than anything else.
I reverse-glossed the first instance of cryptogams, so the second time the word appears it hopefully shouldn't sound as unusual. Esculenta (talk) 20:51, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Einar guided" -> we use surnames. But if "Einar" was how he was known to colleagues and friends, that should be stated (indeed, in boldface, and you might headline the infobox "Einar Du Rietz".
Not sure enough that this is what he was commonly referred to, so changed to surname. Esculenta (talk)
"According to his biographer, .... helped them become independent researchers." The passage seems to slide from reporting Sjörs's views to stating them in Wikipedia's voice, but the claims made sound like a sympathetic biographer's not a neutral encyclopedia's. It all needs reworking.
I reworked this; it perhaps still sounds somewhat sympathetic, but I've made it more clear this is Sjörs's opinion and not Wikipedia's. Esculenta (talk) 20:51, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[8] Sjörs Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift (a very readable article, btw) provides what looks like a carefully-chosen summary of Du Rietz's most important works; and unlike the list we have in the article, which inexplicably gives up after 1949, it continues until 1965.
THE PLANT COVER OF SWEDEN is at this URL. I get an amazing feeling for Du Reitz's instruction looking through his students' careful work! - But we'll have to let 'pedia readers find that out for themselves. We ought to list it straight after 'Selected publications'.
Instead of placing it in that section (dedicated to pubs of the author), I added a couple more sentences in the "Recognition" section sourced to the preface of this publication, linked with the URL you give, so that interested readers will be able to explore more. Esculenta (talk) 20:51, 10 March 2024 (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.
