2713:. Sorry I am new to Wiki edits, and posted my response in the wrong section of Talk. I was searching for Paul Stamet, and was a bit shocked to see him listed as just an American Businessman in his introduction, when his life's work has been in the field of Mycology. The Cambridge Dictionary definition of a mycologist is; "a person who studies mycology (=the science of fungi). For over 40 years Paul Stamets has indeed studied fungi, cultivated mushrooms ( and patented new cultivation techniques) , worked with numerous reputable institutions researching fungi, holds several mycological based patents, has discovered and named several mushrooms, is referenced in many distinguished journals and articles as a mycologist, and has been referenced by many current academically and amateurly trained mycologist as their inspiration in the field. I would not simply leave this argument claiming Paul Staments is in fact a practicing mycologist, I would argue that he is the preeminent mycologist in the United States. If you are going to contend that Paul Staments is not a mycologist, please edit Jane Goodall's wiki page as well. By the logic of those opposing Staments as a mycologist, Goodall is not a primatologist or anthropologist as stated in her wiki. Who arbitrates this dispute? I also think whomever changed my edit has something against Mr Stamets. Listing him as a businessman instead of an author, entrepreneur, speaker, and Mycologist seems to have a negative connotation the way it is written. I think a review is in order and call for a resolution. Clearly, the vast majority of people on this thread list Mr Stamets as a Mycologist. --
3645:
wholesale deletion of another editor's work is harsh, callous, and disrespectful, not to mention lazy. The senior editor in question gives the impression that their seniority, and perhaps their long-term interest in the topic at hand, gives them overarching authority over what can and cannot be included in this article, which of course is not how
Knowledge (XXG) is supposed to operate. The editor also mentioned more than once (a discussion took place on both our user talk pages) that Stamets' credentials as a mycologist were questionable, and generally made their distaste for the individual known. Stamets' credibility aside, this is an instance of non-impartial editorial activity, in my opinion, as if disputed or contentious content had no place on Knowledge (XXG) as long as enough editors agreed it was such, and it gives the impression that since Stamets may not conform to mainstream scientific or research protocols in the field of mycology, perhaps even verging on deception, his profile should be as brief as possible so as not to seem to be promotional (should we then also transform the pages of Deepak Chopra and Dr. Oz into stubs for fear that a lengthy and unnecessarily detail-heavy article lends them undue credibility?!). Lastly, I would like to point out that this type of callous and lazy editorial oversight has a discouraging effect on other editors, certainly less experienced or perhaps less dedicated ones, and when a "senior editor" behaves in this manner, how is one to feel as if the "little guy" has any chance to improve an article that is so closely guarded by mean and inflexible guardians?
2028:"Mycologist" is a title without professional or legal regulation. We have reasons to restrict use of the terms "physician", "lawyer", "professor", and similar to those people who get the institutional recognition which those titles imply. In contrast, all sorts of people are mycologists, so we do not need to restrict use of the term. Even if there were restricts, Stamets has an unusually prominent public image as a mycologist. I lived in Seattle in the 2000s and Stamets was a regular at all sorts of events in that region in that era where he spoke on the topic of mycology. The region has a culture of presenting pop science conferences and he was a regular presenter at those. There are many mycological societies in the region, and for example everyone at the Puget Sound Mycological Society where I was a member knew of him and his works and the fact that he lived close and so frequently spoke on mycology. To the extent that there is a culture of mycology, Stamets has been the biggest contemporary name in the field for the longest amount of time, especially in the popular perception and public visibility. I would expect that no one has presented on the topic of mycology at more conferences and public scheduled events than Stamets. Most of this was in the era just before online documentation. If all this happened now the online media record would be easier to find.
3173:'But most of what Paul sees has eventually been accepted by outside groups. He definitely points us in the right direction' ... A couple of years ago Stamets partnered with Battelle, a major player in the bioremediation industry, on an experiment conducted on a site owned by the Washington State Department of Transportation in Bellingham. Diesel oil had contaminated the site, which the mycoremediation team inoculated with strains of oyster mycelia that Stamets had collected from old-growth forests in the Pacific Northwest. Two other bioremediation teams, one using bacteria, the other using engineered bacteria, were also given sections of the contaminated soil to test. Lo and behold. After four weeks, oyster mushrooms up to 12 inches in diameter had formed on the mycoremediated soil. After eight weeks, 95 percent of the hydrocarbons had broken down, and the soil was deemed nontoxic and suitable for use in WSDOT highway landscaping."
3928:
article that Mr
Stamets is a scientist. There are also no indirect references to any credentials and attributes, such as education and academically recognized works in the field of mycology etc, that would give any objective ground to state that Stamets is a scientist. Yet, there may, perhaps, be enough enough evidence to claim that Mr Stamets is a popularizer, publicist and, perhaps, and activist dedicating his time and works to drawing public attention to the subject of fungi, its potential for the society and economics, and to the importance of advancing scientific research in the field of mycology (all those are good activities, but they have little to do with being a scientist in mycology, that is "MYCOLOGIST" as the first section of the Wiki article claims altogether unsubstantiatedly)
1848:, for each of some 45 other "Host Defense®" mushroom products), none of which is proven by science or approved by the FDA. It's just a scam of made up nonsense sales-speak to impress upon unwary consumers that the self-described "mycologist" - whom consumers visiting his business site are asked to trust before surrendering their money - has discovered and proven all these countless health benefits of mushroom extracts or powders. He has not, and no one has. A true degree-holding mycologist wouldn't engage in reckless lying to scam consumers. Reviewing his business website and seeing the scam is why I came to this article and challenged his title of "mycologist". --
3877:
get included in it should not come down to your diktat. Now I'm being accused of edit warring because I made a second edit?! This is nonsense, and @Ronz I believe you have not been impartial. Why not accuse Zefr of edit warring as well? I'm leaving this article alone because it's not worth my time and frustration, but savvy readers can see this nonsense conflict if they look at the edit history and talk page, and as I mentioned before, not only does this demonstrate a highly unprofessional precedent to
Knowledge (XXG) readers and editors, but it discourages editors from going against "senior editors" because clearly there is a hierarchy of power at work here.
2887:
minimum study mycology is curious. There is no need to describe him as an amaturer mycologist. Clearly, Paul
Stamets is a professional in the area of mycology. The education section speaks for itself. It is absolutely incredible that someone like Paul Stamets has risen to his stature in the field of mycology without an advanced degree. Let us not forget the other great scientists who lacked an advanced degree such as Charles Darwin, Thomas Edison (who only had 3 months of high school), Jane Goodall (which was mentioned above), and countless more. This is silly now. I agree with the above post that this needs resolved.
3168:"A former logger turned scanning-electron microscopist, Stamets is not your typical scientist -- a role he obviously relishes ... 'He's the most creative thinker I know,' says Dr. Donald Abrams, the assistant director of the AIDS program at San Francisco General Hospital and a professor of clinical medicine at the University of California at San Francisco. Abrams says he became interested in the medicinal properties of mushrooms after hearing one of Stamets' lectures. Stamets is now a co-investigator on a grant proposal Abrams is authoring on the anti-HIV properties of oyster mushrooms.
1547:- While I understand while some would consider the use of the term wrong, since he doesn't have a degree, I think the word can be used due to his extensive work in the field. His lack of credential could be, should be and actually is mentioned in the article, however. Describing him as a "self-taught mycologist" sounds pretty good and immediately gives the general idea. On the other hand "self-taught botanist on mushroom topics" sound horrible and just makes it seem that whoever wrote that paragraph doesn't know the word "mycologist" and had to improvise.
2152:
reputable institution, peer-reviewed publishing in quality journals, competitive grants with concrete outcomes, promotion to higher ranks, international respect from peers in the same discipline. Do we know if the international community of professional mycologists sees
Stamets as a peer mycologist? There's no evidence that they do, especially if having reviewed the blatant fraud of false health claims on his business website and bizarre delusions in his speeches, both of which disaffirm his credibility and title as a scientist or mycologist.
481:
453:
617:
586:
2774:), does not translate to well established consensus. This is something that could have been fixed without a sudden RfC too given how little discussion occurred in the above section. Normally it's better to wait at least more than 24 hours before an RfC while others watching can comment with other ideas tackling the issue. Usually that negates the need for an RfC in the first place, or else it gives developed ideas for people to comment on for a good RfC comparison if it's actually needed.
421:
491:
397:
1866:
mushroom spawn, maintain a sterile environment to prevent contamination, etc., some of these aspects literally require a laboratory environment, and repeatable refined practices are necessary. I would say that if there are concerns about some of the health claims that
Stamets makes, then that deserves some space in the article. But while some perspectives may be fringe or controversial, that doesn't make him any less of a mycologist ... that may make him a somewhat
627:
760:
2868:- Stamets became the first-ever recipient of the Mycology Society of America's Gordon and Tina Wasson Award. Named after the late preeminent ethnomycologists, the award is intended “to recognize people with non-traditional academic backgrounds who have made outstanding contributions to the field of mycology, or who have widely transmitted significant scientific or aesthetic knowledge about fungi to the general public.
2942:
entrepreneurial, and it is clear from the rest of the article that
Stamets runs a business focused on mushroom products. 'Largely self-taught mycologist' is more focused, and that wording is close to what Michael Pollan wrote, but in my opinion no qualifiers are necessary as the nature of his study and business are made clear in the article and we can reasonably expect our readers to read more than a single sentence.
817:
792:
956:
2378:
typically restrained to trained academics possessing advanced degrees in a scientific field and doing empirical work at an independent research institution does run the risk of bootstrapping the credibility of the subject some. So either further discussion of any controversial statements the man may have made in his relationship to the field might be necessary if we are to label him with said formal title.
335:
307:
720:
203:
884:
863:
732:
276:
3850:
includes the names of pyramid schemes, cults, hate groups, and various other objectionable structures in the articles of people involved. Naming the company does not have anything to do with professional mycologists or scientists, or their approval or acceptance. The company sells, among other things, home mushroom growing kits and hats with mushroom graphics on them.
557:
1077:: Respectfully, the sources you provided and those public news reports in the article do not rigorously address Stamets' credentials, and probably heard it from Stamets himself upon introduction or from his reputation as a "mushroom expert", which he may be, but not by academic or scientific achievement, which would be earned by the rigorous achievement of a
467:
2384:
the awkwardly titled "Mushroom interest" section) is not thereafter removed, and also to keep an eye on any claims relating to scientific topics which may arise in the article in the future. Context is important here, and while I appreciate the straightforward RfC prompt here, I think we need to be careful of not losing site of the forest for the trees.
2125:
titles like "mycologist", "biologist", "scientist"?. If any sources call a person "mycologist", then why challenge them when the term does not have a deep or formal meaning? You seem to be framing this as a discussion about the regulation of a title. If this is not about regulating the use of the title, then what are the important issues here?
345:
1378:
definition of a mycologist, "a person who studies mycology (=the science of fungi)", set forth in the
Cambridge University Dictionary, it is apparent that Stamets falls within the category of mycologist. But, again, I do agree with your point about the gold standard sources who also consider him a mycologist.
1361:
definition of a mycologist, "a person who studies mycology (=the science of fungi)", set forth in the
Cambridge University Dictionary, it is apparent that Stamets falls within the category of mycologist. But, again, I do agree with your point about the gold standard sources who also consider him a mycologist.
2670:. I think it would be better to write "self-taught mycologist" rather than leaving the impression that he is an academically trained mycologist. ("Amateur mycologist" appears incorrect as he has a related business.) But he has clearly published on mushrooms; that is enough to make him a mycologist, to me. —
4087:
I updated the section "Personal Life", which had a single sentence that was factually incorrect: "Stamets is married to
Carolyn "Dusty" Yao." With referenced sources I updated the year they were married and the year they were divorced. I also added information about Stamets' first marriage, from an
3849:
Knowledge (XXG) does not need to assess the company's merits to mention it. The 'burden of proof' is that company exists. This is easily proven and sourced. While I do not agree that Fungi Perfecti is fraudulent, even if it is, that is also not a reason for exclusion from the article. Knowledge (XXG)
1989:
as a blogger. The article is now using a source that calls him a mycologist to support the statement that he "has a layman's interest in mushrooms". I don't think that anybody who makes a living with mushrooms whether by farming them, or foraging them to sell, is accurately described as a mycological
1679:
says so. The question this RfC really should have boiled down to if it wasn't started prematurely is whether there's any legitimate reason to include calling him a mycologist in the article itself. So far, there isn't anything that tries to justify that other than saying sources exist, which violates
1678:
policy is very clear that being sourced isn't enough. Not to mention that Nature itself doesn't say what you claim. Barbara Kiser writing for them was reviewing a book that just namedrops Stamets. That's barely a tangential look at his credentials, so we can't really be making a statement that Nature
1594:
policy is clear that the existence of sources doesn't guarantee inclusion. Being a coauthor on academic papers doesn't make you a biologist if you're a chemist, etc and don't have higher-level training as a biologist. You really need to pull from academic sources in such a situation when dealing with
1225:
Paul is an advisor to the Program of Integrative Medicine at the University of Arizona Medical School, Tucson, on the editorial board of The International Journal of Medicinal Mushrooms. Stamets helped author and supply the first two NIH-funded clinical studies using medicinal mushrooms in the United
4039:
What I found here is that we should just swap the article for the talk page. The guy is pretty much, and verifiable by numerous sources, relevant for Knowledge (XXG), mycologist, successful entrepreneur, researcher, all that WHILE being biased, self-taught, kinda nuts and with COI, not DESPITE that.
3958:
As with EVERYTHING else (the height of a building, whether someone is a white supremacist, what the capital of a country is, how many copies of an album were sold, etc.), Knowledge (XXG) reports what independent reliable sources say about a subject. If multiple independent reliable sources said that
3927:
In the first lines of the first section it says without any references or factual substantiation that Paul Stamets is "mycologist", which is a scientist engaged in, in this case, in a branch of natural science of biology, namely mycology). Nor does it follows from all the subsequent sections of the
3516:
As far as I am concerned the "mycologist" discussion should be closed. There are only three in opposition (principle active opposition from Ronz and Zefr) and ~sixteen with support. We have citations from Nature, Discover, NY Times, NPR, etc. supporting the term "mycologist" which is merely somebody
2472:
There's something more at stake here than just deciding whether Stamets can be called a mycologist. Reviewing several videos of his speeches reveals a brilliant mind and memory, extensive knowledge of mushroom species, charisma, arrogance, fast talking, and evangelist-like persuasion of the audience
2412:
You partly summarize why this RfC is moot. It doesn't address specific content, and it was launched before a content-specific question could be crafted in normal discussion to fine-tune language. Even with that in mind, we've already moved beyond the question of whether to call him a mycologist with
2383:
However, again, even better would be to look at specific wording relating to how the title is applied. If it's a matter of sticking it (unqualified) into the lead sentence, extra care will need to be taken to make sure the information noting that he holds no degree related tot he field (currently in
2329:
as lower-case "mycologist" but not "Mycologist." As mentioned above, some professions are licensed and some self-proclaimed. Stamets can be a mycologist even though he has a dietary supplement business that rests on dubious science. In the U.S., the entire dietary supplement industry is only lightly
1139:
support the status quo for referenced content, which is here is inclusion of the descriptor 'mycologist'. This has been included in the article for years. You provide no evidence for your claim that multiple reliable sources 'probably heard it from stamets himself.' Are you of the opinion that James
4161:
You will notice that my updated information did provide information on both marriages from reliable sources, as defined by Knowledge (XXG). Namely, the Discovery Magazine article from 2013, which was based on interviews of Stamets himself. If it helps, I can find other published information about
4014:
Your ideology that the words "scientist" and "mycologist" describe a narrow band of institutionally-granted titles has really no bearing on Knowledge (XXG). He's a scientist and a mycologist because (a) he engages in those activities and (b) because sources call him a mycologist and a scientist. No
3803:
Fungi Perfecti is mentioned in multiple RS sources that discuss Stamets. The company name appears in 3+ NYTimes articles, and in several other publications used as refs here. Including a company or organization name that has been discussed in reliable sources is neither endorsement nor advertising.
2349:
It's a tough call, I have to say. As a general matter, I think its problematic to include a title which imparts to the reader an implication of a certain degree of formal training in an empirical biological field where no such formal education and traditional credentials exist. On the other hand,
1865:
And while all of the benefits may not be scientifically proven, Chinese medicine has, for example, made use of a variety of mushrooms for different purposes. Regardless, it is undeniable that in order to run a successful mushroom grow operation, a lot of science is definitely involved. To propagate
1169:
of his scientific standing - beyond public media (by what scientific standards do those publications use to verify him as a mycologist?) - is needed to verify that he has the standing of "mycologist". A credible source is a university bestowing a PhD in Biology, subspecialty Mycology (or government
4043:
The current state of the article merely harms its purpose. Relevant information is being withheld out of personal disagreement. This doesn't damages Stamets' business as he already advocates for himself pretty damn well, this damages Knowledge (XXG) and the reader's access to relevant knowledge to
3876:
This is becoming quite ridiculous. @Zefr, you are acting like an absolute bully, reverting any edit that doesn't suit your prejudiced view of Stamets, whom you are calling a scammer on no basis that I can see supported anywhere. You are not the gatekeeper for this article and what does and doesn't
3335:
Insisting that he's merely a 'voice for the mycelium,' Stamets says he can't really take credit for his discoveries about an extraordinarily diverse and evolutionarily successful kingdom that modern science has scarcely explored. Still, over the past four years, he has filed for twenty-two patents
3170:
Jack Word, former manager of the marine science lab at Battelle Laboratories in Sequim, Wash., calls Stamets 'a visionary.' Stamets takes bigger, faster leaps than institutional science, acknowledges Word, who, along with Stamets and several other Battelle researchers, is an applicant on a pending
2372:
However, its worth pointing out that we should probably be considering the question of whether to include it in full context, so we know exactly what is being said regarding the main's professional and academic status, rather than !voting the inclusion of the word itself up or down. I'm concerned
4106:
Furthermore, other Internet Services (such as Google) pick up information from Knowledge (XXG) and provide answers to questions like "Is Paul Stamets married?". Currently they provide incorrect information because the Knowledge (XXG) information is incorrect. Deleting the entire "Personal Life"
4098:
Stamets is a public person and personality, by his own choice and by social and media engagement with him. Many living public people, including actors and politicians, have their marital history and status on their Knowledge (XXG) page. I know of no rule against it. (If there is such a rule or
2124:
You raise various issues which I do not immediately see as relevant to this discussion. I think that your primary argument is that "mycologist" is a title which requires a credential to claim. Do you have any source to back up the idea that there is any formal or informal regulation on the use of
2098:
in QUACKS) "If science rejects your favoured mushroom therapy, Knowledge (XXG) is not the place to fix it. Instead, come up with robust, replicable scientific evidence, published in reputable journals, and then we will tell the world all about it." This RfC will support calling Stamets an amateur
4288:
I found a link to the original Discovery Magazine website, but it might be pay-walled. I will double check. Yes, link was to the author's personal website, which had the complete, original article with no paywall or advertising. Maybe I will include both (like Internet Archive links are often
3644:
Within a very short time, a senior editor (Zefr) came along and scrubbed my entire edit session, as if none of it had any validity or value to the article (even his bibliography being more accurate as a result, really?!). The revert was poorly explained, in my opinion, but more importantly, such
1806:
that say "Stamets is a hobbyist with enthusiasm for mushrooms the way a gardener (with no botany degree) has enthusiasm for flowers." Utterly ridiculous. Stamets is clearly not a hobbyist, as he is published, engaged in scientific peer-reviewed research, and has been running a succesful mushroom
1261:
Mycologist is not an honorific title. Mycologist comes from the root 'myco' which relates to fungi an 'ologist' which means expert or student. Under your theory Darwin would not be a botanist or a biologist since he did not obtain an advanced degree. Moreover, Washington University and Evergreen
3281:
Speaking as someone who is a co-inventor on more than a dozen U.S. patents, I do not support patents as citations. 'Evidence' described in patent applications need not be from actual, conducted science experiments. Rather, can be just thought experiments. If there is ever to be a section on his
2941:
Describing Stamets as a mycologist is not misleading. It is following numerous reliable sources. 'Entrepreneurial mycologist' is not used by any source that I have seen except for the TED profile, and adds a vague qualifier. Anyone who uses scientific research for financial ends could be called
2886:
There is nothing misleading by stating the fact that Paul Stamets is a mycologist. I state that this is a fact because as was stated above, the Cambridge Dictionary definition of a mycologist is; "a person who studies mycology (=the science of fungi).” To contend that Paul Stamets does not at a
1295:
A journal doesn't refer to an author's professional practice, but rather her/his affiliation, as displayed in the Nature article by clicking on the author name: Paul E. Stamets, Fungi Perfecti, LLC. Olympia, Washington, USA. And that article is only peripherally related to mycology; it is about
4247:
looks like a good secondary source (it's a magazine with its own Knowledge (XXG) article, and this article on Stamets was written by Kenneth Miller), so I think it'd be reasonable to include some info on Stamets' marriages and personal life. The URL probably links to a personal website because
4094:
reverted my edits and deleted the entire "Personal Life" section, with comment "trivial content". I believe this reversion is unwarranted, capricious, and a disservice to Knowledge (XXG) readers. Labeling it as "trivial content" is a weak justification. "Trivial content" about a person might
3365:
After some culturing, Stamets was able to develop a pre-sporulating strain of the fungus and grew it onto some rice. He then put the rice in the path of the ants, where they promptly consumed it with abandon. A few days later, he was ant-free ... This led Stamets on the path to using this as a
2518:
salesman, Stamets' public speeches are laced with technical terms that fly fast and high over the heads of his lay audiences, while making leaps of interpretation to impossible conclusions intended to impress and create agreement, and probably, new customers for his falsely-advertised mushroom
2151:
to the formal professional mycologist title. In science and medicine, having an "ist" at the end of a professional title means something. Biologist, chemist, pharmacologist, cardiologist. Titles earned by more than a decade of higher education, achievement of advanced degrees, appointment to a
1589:
addressing this (this looks like a premature RfC with so little discussion), sums up my views already. The sources given like the Seattle Times, NYT, etc. really aren't that great for this content when a more self-stylized description without credentials runs into problems, not to mention that
1377:
SummerPhDv2.0, I agree with you. I should have been more thorough in my original post. The Nature paper, NYT article and countless other sources establish consensus outside of this Knowledge (XXG) thread that Paul Stamets is a mycologist. My point is even if we look at the plain meaning of the
1360:
SummerPhDv2.0, I agree with you. I should have been more thorough in my original post. The Nature paper, NYT article and countless other sources establish consensus outside of this Knowledge (XXG) thread that Paul Stamets is a mycologist. My point is even if we look at the plain meaning of the
3112:
So two different editors have removed information about patents using different reasoning. I don't want to make any accusations, but it seems ironic that the same editors who believe Stamets is not a mycologist are also engaged in a very intentional removal of information about his scientific
2377:
status of the man's views on the field, and yet I see no mention of any of this in the article, and thus (as someone unfamiliar with his work, claims, or business ventures) would be completely unaware of these facets of the man's notability from reading the article alone. Using a formal title
4260:. What if you looked up a record by someone with the same name as Paul Stamets by mistake? An expert from a secondary source should be doing this kind of research, not Wikipedians. I think mention of the divorce should be sourced to something else or removed. Hope this helps. Happy editing. –
4035:
I came to understand the subject after a video and found an article short to the point of confusion. Came to the talk page and what I've read here is so absurd to be hilarious. The very reason I came was that I wanted to understand the context of his more weird statements, but the article is
3366:
natural, and possibly superior, alternative to conventional pest control. Thus far, the few sound bytes he has produced on the subject have been rather guarded on details, awaiting his patent ... Recently Stamets announced that he had received two patents on his fungal pest control solution.
3486:
This is just another example of many public radio segments establishing redundant evidence that Paul Stamets is indeed a Mycologist. To contend that Stamets does not at the very least study fungi in the field of mycology is curious and I question the motivations behind such faulty logic.
1729:, he is "Paul Stamets, a mycologist in Olympia, Wash." Against all of that, we've decided that he is an "author, blogger, and an advocate". I'm sure he's all of those things, but that large, flap-eared, tusked, land animal in the room is pretty clearly -- and verifiably -- an elephant. -
4102:
Since Stamets himself has talked about his marriages and, especially, the impact they had on his professional and business career, his marriage history and status are not purely private information, hidden from public view, nor are they irrelevant to his professional and public persona.
2254:
him as a mycologist. Milla Kunis is an actress, Stamets is a mycologist, the large animal with a trunk in the room is an elephant. Whatever the quality of her work, we aren't going to avoid calling Kunis an actress because she doesn't have a PhD, her work is weak and you want more than
3632:
created Career section and mentioned Stamets' work, such as his editorial position, consulting position at the University of Arizona, and research activity, including his participation in clinical studies (referenced); mentioned patents (referenced), discovery of new mushroom species,
1096:) is good for marketing and misleading the consumer public that he is an accomplished, respected scientist who can be trusted to sell anyone mushroom supplements, which have no scientifically proven benefits for health, i.e., a scam. The evidence for him as a mycologist does not meet
4303:
I take to heart your caution about using names of people who are not yet public persona. Of the two marriages, only Carolyn "Dusty" Yao is mentioned because her name appears in several published media (magazines, blogs, video) as his wife and was a co-owner and partner in Stamets'
2450:
Actually, we haven't moved beyond the question of whether or not to call Stamets a mycologist ... though it would seem there is a fair amount of support for referring to Stamets as a "self-trained mycologist" as specific academic credentials are not required for such a designation.
1326:
There are countless articles where various editors dispute whether a person is a white nationalist, white supremacist, white separatist, racial realist or some other variation. The apologists tend to favor some mealy-mouthed, term dreamed up for the occasion and drag out individual
3000:
You are correct. However, it is Singularity U who is simply promoting him as "the world's leading mycologist". An organization made that determination based on his body of work and reputation. Just like countless other publications which are cited above. This is getting tiresome.
2791:
I've looked over the editing for COI problems. In addition to the three accounts I declared as connected contributors, there are edits from SPAs and ips that are likely. Given the amount of attention the article has received since, I'm not seeing anything that needs follow-up.
1480:
An editor recently removed 'mycologist', arguing that Stamets' lack of academic credentials or affiliation is justification for removing the description. Stamets does not have an advanced degree, but he has (1)coauthored peer reviewed papers in the field of mycology including
2367:, if we feel that it would be misleading to the reader in some way. So I did go back and forth on the matter as a consequence of that legitimate concern. However, when considering the full context of the label and the quality of the sources, I have to lean towards inclusion.
1100:. Stamets has only a Bachelor's degree (at a liberal arts college, and with unknown major) which does not entitle him to academic recognition as a mycology specialist within a scientific discipline, and is not recognized as a mycologist by any university or government body.
1870:
mycologist, but a mycologist all the same. For an analogy: I would argue that most farmers do not hold advanced degrees, yet we still consider them farmers ... a lot of them hold very different views, but at the end of the day, they are growing and producing food. If
2752:
It is not a 'push'. It was the established consensus for years on this article. The push appears to be in the direction of actively removing the term. There are certainly other aspects of Stamets work that could be better covered. That is outside the scope of this
3835:: "Every single person who believes a lunatic like Stamets needs to go back to check their premises and think harder about what it means to be honest, factual, truthful." The company doesn't meet this burden of proof, and should not be highlighted in the lead. --
3618:
I recently did an edit on this article, where I translated the one from the Greek Wiki and complemented the English article with missing information, or what I thought was "non-contentious, acceptable, and relevant information". Here is a list of edits I made:
3549:
if you do plan on remaining an editor on this page, you might want to familiarize yourself with the differences between mushrooms, mycelium, and fungi. From your edits and comments, it seems dubious at best that you are familiar with the meanings. Then again,
2907:
Ronz, I'm just curious, on the Administrator's notice board you refrenced that this RfC has COI and is FRINDGE. How do you justify that? Where is the conflict of interest? The issue before the editors is whether or not Paul Stamets constitutes a mycologist.
3697:
In addition to focusing on content rather than editors, it's always helpful to work in small edits with clear and descriptive edit summaries. Please be sure that any new content is clearly verified by independent and reliable sources that meet BLP-quality.
2011:). Stamets is described as a mycologist in many sources (which often mention his lack of formal training), and he has been recognized by a major scholarly society for academically trained mycologists. "Self taught mycologist" is a fair way to describe him.
2588:
sources are absent to uncover his delusions and deceit. This RfC will democratically identify him as a mycologist, but a caveat is needed to show that this title enhances his credibility and opportunity to deceive consumers of his company's products.
3818:
Mention of his company by credible sources that didn't rigorously assess him or his company does not make the company notable or scientifically valid. The company itself has not been critically reviewed by peers in mycology, so this is a matter of
3662:
I agree that removals have been excessive on this page. If some aspect of Stamets' work has been covered by 2+ reliable sources, it is reasonable to include it in the article unless clear objections based on policy are detailed on this talk page.
3784:
states that notability is required in the lead. His company is not notable in the general public, does not have content in the article body (nor should it), and is a conspicuous scam that the encyclopedia should not enable for advertising per
1423:. There is an overwhelming number of editors in favor of this position and the opposes have produced no policy-based reason to dismiss those opinions. The opposes mostly point to the fact that Stamets has no advanced degree in the subject,
3034:
To repeat the overwhelming majority of the editors of this thread: What about the Seattle Times, the NY Times,Discover Magazine and Nature? What about the fact that he has discovered multiple species of fungi previously unknown to science?
3525:, and then proceeded to answer it yourself, again bringing up the term "mycologist." That is why I replied with two more sources covering an interview with some of Stamets background and current mycological research. It is my opinion that
4190:
from the California Courts about a divorce. If the 2021 divorce is a fact, then there appears to be no useful and current personal information, justifying the deletion. Your edit also introduced 3 format errors in the sentence; observe
3477:
Multiple NPR segments cite Paul Stamets as a Mycologist. A recent example from the segment "Here and Now" with Robin Young discussing some of his work with Washington State University and the Department of Agriculture, January 2019.
1840:- such as by teaching or publishing false information - can stigmatize and negatively isolate a career forever in the science community. Stamets' and his company advertise mushroom products as having diverse health benefits, such as
2519:
supplements. The caveat is needed for context of how Knowledge (XXG) should present an amateur mycologist (or any supposed scientist) who is also a huckster peddling unproven natural products advertised as disease preventatives,
2289:- On paper he may not have the qualifications but his extensive work in the field certainly qualifies him as one. It is not our position to decide whether he is or isn't qualified. Let's report what reliable sources have to say.
1226:
States. His strain collection is extensive and unique, with many of the strains coming from old growth forests. He worked with the NIH-governed BioShield BioDefense Program since 2005 to develop new defenses against bioterrorism.
3211:... He has supplied cultures to Bastyr University for a study of one strain’s immunological effects on breast-cancer patients. He has supplied cultures to the University of Mississippi for testing against smallpox and E. coli.
2081:
to be recognized among professional peers as mycologists. In contrast to Stamets' undergraduate degree, hobby, and supplement business with mushrooms, the examples of Lodge and Hibbett are benchmarks for defining a mycologist.
2890:
I also respectfully disagree with the "entrepreneurial mycologist" descriptor. I think anyone who reads the page understands that Stamets did not seek an advanced degree. Moreover, the term itself is confusing in my opinion.
2856:- Stamets' Nature article Extracts of Polypore Mushroom Mycelia Reduce Viruses in Honey Bees is ranked in the 99th percentile of over 260,000 tracked articles of a similar age in all journals tracked by Scientific Reports.
1221:
He is the author of many scholarly papers in peer-reviewed journals (The International Journal of Medicinal Mushrooms; Evidence Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine (eCAM, Oxford University Press); Herbalgram, and
934:
2006:
being called a neuroscientist, but she hasn't contributed to the field since receiving her degree). And having an advanced degree is not incompatible with making fringy claims or recklessly lying to scam consumers (cf.
1327:
quotes/actions/beliefs and definitions. By combining the quotes/actions/beliefs ("A") with the definitions ("B") they synthesize the claim the person is "really" a swell person ("C"). A + B = C. We explain that that is
3922:
The unsubstantiated claim that Paul Statements is "mycologist" - a scientist in the field of mycology - is not up to Wiki standards and may create false perceptions in the general public (both about Stamets and about
1510:
2060:
is well-known from public media, and convinces that he loves mushrooms with diverse knowledge about them. But such background is unrigorous for an encyclopedia to define a "mycologist". It is more consistent with a
1765:
a mycologist, but my point in the discussion above is that there is no academic verification of Stamets as a degree-holding mycologist, an academic title and discipline that would require earning a PhD. There is no
4399:
2583:
persuaded by a "mycologist" to use his mushroom products and ignore physician-prescribed medicines. Mushrooms and Stamets don't have the category visibility to attract critical attention as Oz or Mercola have, so
411:
3636:
added Recognition section, mentioning the awards Stamets has received throughout his career (referenced), mentions of and interviews with him in documentary films (referenced), TED and TEDMED talks he has done,
153:
1566:- Mycology is one of a few fields with heavy support from amateurs (another being astronomy). He does not have the typical academic credentials, but that is a separate issue. His whole career is mycology. --
4414:
1342:
and other gold standard reliable sources call Stamets a mycologist in no uncertain terms. It's how they identify him. Meryl Streep is an actress, ______ is a white supremacist, Paul Stamets is a mycologist. -
435:
2354:
matter, not one to be determined primarily by our own idiosyncratic breakdown / original research as to what qualifies the article's subject to hold this or that position. Now, one might argue that meeting
1778:
requires those wishing to call him a mycologist to verify his academic credentials. Stamets is a hobbyist with enthusiasm for mushrooms the way a gardener (with no botany degree) has enthusiasm for flowers.
1232:
In June of 2012, Paul Stamets received an honorary, accredited Doctorate of Science degree (D.Sc.) from the National College for Natural Medicine for his academic achievements and for expanding the field of
3954:
Knowledge (XXG) does not establish credentials necessary to qualify as a mycologist then dig into the subject's background to identify his credentials then have a vote to see if those credentials meet the
4504:
924:
1108:), typically taught and researched among expert colleagues at a university (which would be credible evidence for a "mycologist" title if Stamets was affiliated with a university, which he is not). Under
3997:
I'm not part of the wikipedia editors circle at all and am just perusing, but I noticed that Stamets is not listed as a mycologist in the fungi wikiprojects list of mycologists. Should this be changed?
3752:
The name of Stamets' company, Fungi Perfecti, should appear in the lede. It is covered by multiple RS sources including a number of refs used in this article. A brief mention of the company name is not
1471:. The article on Paul Stamets has described Stamets as a mycologist in the lede since the article was created in November 2004‎. The talk page shows no concern about the word prior to September 2019,
2825:
2182:
You seem to be asking that reliable source cite sources and provide backup for their statements and respond to your definition of terms. (This, of course, would demand that the sources' sources cite
4248:
someone took the original magazine PDF and cropped it to only include this one article. The URL could be deleted from the citation template if it's an issue. There is no guidance or prohibition in
1904:. The research study shows significant immunological benefits derived from mushrooms that aids bees and helps them to resist viral loads. Some real science there. I have read that report! Cheers.
1493:). (3)written widely read technical books on mushroom cultivation (4)participated in a “diverse array of experiments — often in tandem with researchers at universities or nonprofit outfits” (from
900:
4394:
3137:
The Mother Jones source mentions the numbers in passing, in context of Stamets discoveries and concerns about "big bad pharma". I'm not sure it deserves even a footnote without better sources. --
823:
797:
3675:
sources. I suggest focusing on content rather than editors; if the content is sound, supported by multiple reliable sources, and gets repeatedly removed, there are ways to escalate, including
1627:- (I was asked by Zefr to comment here. I don't know why as I don't seem to have been involved with the article in any way. In any case, I disagree with Zefr so I don't see a foul here.) The
4459:
4409:
4499:
3804:
Your view that his company is a scam is a separate issue that has no bearing on inclusion or exclusion of content. If you have RS refs that describe the company as such, please add them.
657:
406:
317:
1503:
1044:
891:
868:
3823:
on Stamets and his company (and on editors who are misled to believe him) to prove acceptance by professional mycologists or more broadly the scientific community. They are not. See
3432:
Is this the only detailed biography we have on him? I notice it doesn't call him a "mycologist" outright, but does call him "a renowned expert on mushrooms" and "mushroom expert". --
430:
321:
1875:
considers Stamets a mycologist then perhaps we should take pause. Controversial, somewhat fringe, outspoken and kinda weird, etc.? Maybe so. But Paul Stamets is still a mycologist.
1599:
topics where a person's description matters too. If it weren't for the fringe aspect, then the titles wouldn't matter as much, and comments like NessieVL's would carry more weight.
255:
3533:
has some undisclosed bias and is far from neutral in this conversation. There have been unnecessary deletions and I am reading a lot of contrarian nonconstructive statements from
4307:
I also understand the rules about no original research. The court record can be found through websites that offer that service, but I understand these sources do not qualify as
3517:
who studies fungi. Stamets clearly fits into this category, regardless if he has a fungi company, regardless if he has an advanced degree. You brought up this biography question
1990:"layman"; although I would not call all such persons "mycologists" (and a professional gardener isn't a layman with an enthusiasm for flowers). Stamets was the recipient of the
674:
4186:
There was an adequate statement and source (reference #1) before your edit. You added a source from the Discover author's personal website, trivial information about Weil, and
1713:-- identification of him. Yes, a source might mention that Meryl Streep was once a waitress (I'm making this up), but I'm sure multiple sources identify her as an actress. So,
3735:
Reviewing everything in the second, much smaller attempt at expansion, the only thing that I'm unsure of is birthplace. I've tagged it, assuming that it's verified already. --
4404:
2653:
This is far out of proportion. Forget it and get real. It's not as though we were saying "THE mycologist". Walls of text on a matter that hardly demands a discussion at all!
2575:, and biased against homeopathy using mushrooms to cure cancer, smallpox, or other diseases; and 3) biased towards medical treatments proven to be effective by high-quality
4509:
4252:
about mentioning marriages that I can see. Just be careful not to mention any wives or childrens' names unless they are already famous (have Knowledge (XXG) articles) per
194:
1985:. He may not have an advanced degree in mycology, but the current wording of the article goes way too far the other way. I wouldn't characterize somebody who has written
4419:
2880:- Stamets received the President's Award from the Society for Ecological Restoration: Northwest Chapter, in recognition of his contributions to Ecological Restoration.
710:
2168:
applies: "claims (of his being a professional mycologist) that are contradicted by the prevailing view within the relevant community" (of professional mycologists). --
1926:
Further, I would like to ask if there are any reliable sources that challenge the credentials of Stamets, the viability of his work, or refute his published materials?
147:
2002:
mycological expertise was self-taught. And having a PhD doesn't mean that somebody necessarily continues to work in the field of their degree (I have no objection to
1043:
The description of Stamets in the lede was recently edited to remove the descriptor 'Mycologist'. Multiple RS sources describe Stamets as a mycologist. These include
4454:
700:
260:
4439:
4172:
information about his marriage(s), when public people regularly have such information in their Knowledge (XXG) pages, under "Personal Life" or similar sections?
1311:
Can't we settle this dispute by merely looking to the plain meaning of the term mycology and mycologist? Please provide me with your definition of a mycologist.
664:
2069:. While the majority of this RfC sides (as of 10 Sep 19) with calling him an "amateur mycologist", let's consider the bios of professional mycologists, such as
79:
4484:
4384:
774:
2186:
sources and so on, down the rabbit hole.) Essentially, you seem to be saying that your opinion that he is not a mycologist should replace the judgements of
4494:
2962:
243:) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
3676:
2070:
1262:
State College both recognize him as a mycologist on their websites. So, he is a scientist even under your made up standard of who gets to be a scientist.
669:
2809:"Entrepreneurial mycologist", from the TED profile, is a concise description that isn't as promotional or potentially misleading as simply mycologist. --
1832:
implies a scientist's adherence to rigorous principles and practices, as expected for people who have actually earned an advanced degree for the title,
1585:. Better to just remove the term and focus on what he does as an advocate of bioremediation and medicinal use of fungi. The rather short section above,
363:
235:
2506:
1490:
1932:
here at Knowledge (XXG). Please provide references to any reliable sources that back your position that Stamets is somehow not a mycologist. Thanks.
547:
4489:
4210:
85:
4449:
4434:
4424:
3460:
currently used as references have as much biographical content as the Seattle Times article, and both refer to him as a mycologist multiple times.
1524:, but this is also true of some more credentialed scientists, and concerns about this aspect of his work would be better addressed by addition of
537:
3395:
Looking through the sources and potential ones mentioned in discussions, where are the detailed biographies, and how do they describe Stamets? --
1966:, having no formal, academic credentials for it. It beggars credulity to see an RfC about such a trivially obvious issue or rather a non-issue. -
1276:
I think we need to add the description mycologist. Nature, one of the most respected scientific journals refers to Paul Stamets as a mycologist.
367:
4296:
sources for the marriages divorces. I found Ancestry.com sources for the first marriage and divorce, and also for the section marriage, but no
4095:
include -- which toe is longest, freckle configuration on the face or birthmark, their favorite color, or the most famous person they ever met.
3482:. Here is a longer segment produced by American Public Media and North Carolina Public Radio. Cited from their segment The Story August, 2010.
3457:
2494:
1513:
1494:
1296:
supposed antiviral activity in bees, if it exists, as there is no confirmation of this primary research in current peer-reviewed literature. --
1207:
1006:
1900:
of Stamets more than anything. Please don't overlook the recently published peer-reviewed actual scientific work that he has participated in:
1424:
640:
591:
4469:
3943:
1170:
position, such as in the USDA) and with a verifiable research background in the academic field of mycology would qualify him. He's more of a
750:
3087:"(→‎Patents: SOAP - if there are independent sources that support any mention of any of his patents, please bring them up on the talk page)"
4479:
4016:
44:
30:
1604:
In short, there's no compelling reason to call him a mycologist given his background, and there are easy fixes to get around that which I
3891:
As long as you're going to focus on editors rather than content, you're going to find attempts to edit Knowledge (XXG) to be frustrating.
1639:
directly, without equivocation of any kind and in their own voices say Stamets is a mycologist. If your opinion runs counter to those of
1055:. He has also coauthored peer reviewed papers in the field including Extracts of Polypore Mushroom Mycelia Reduce Viruses in Honey Bees (
362:, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Knowledge (XXG)'s articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
4444:
4389:
3268:
3228:
3182:
3116:
2452:
2309:
1933:
1905:
1876:
1808:
1761:. The edits to the lede and other article sections yesterday and today leave the article in better shape. SummerPhDv2.0 said Stamets is
1239:
3667:
may apply to article content based solely on a single source, particularly one connected with the article subject, but reads more like
2514:
inferred a caveat that we are obligated to identify negative attributes if we concede to calling Stamets a mycologist. Like those of a
769:
600:
513:
4474:
2623:
652:
371:
2771:
974:
358:
312:
99:
2826:
Knowledge (XXG):Administrators'_noticeboard/Requests_for_closure#Talk:Paul_Stamets#RfC_about_description_of_Paul_Stamets_in_the_lede
1112:, the encyclopedic responsibility for objectivity (and for Knowledge (XXG) to not falsely promote an unearned designation) would be
1022:
990:
2305:
1929:
1402:
966:
104:
20:
1651:
a mycologist. While I understand the various arguments about whether or not it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, etc. But if
1995:
648:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
4107:
section will not solve this problem, because "scraping" services like Google will just retain and use the previous information.
74:
4429:
2700:
2217:-violations in this discussion could easily be applied to deny the credentials of numerous credentialed media personalities. -
1444:
3102:
Stamets has filed 22 patent applications, and has been awarded at least four patents related to non-toxic fungal pest control.
2689:. A person who heads a company dealing with mushrom and who has written several books on the subject by definition deals with
1502:
Stamets and his work with mushrooms have been covered by numerous articles, which describe him as a mycologist. These include
287:
4464:
1991:
1721:
has "crusading mycologist Paul Stamet" in the secondary headline, and by the second sentence he has become "the mycologist".
896:
1433:
504:
458:
65:
3541:. Please keep your editing neutral and avoid non-consensual deletions against the strong majority of editors on this page.
168:
3108:
And it was quickly reverted by another editor that stated: "(Undid revision 914084314 by 65.60.163.223 WP:PEA; WP:NOTCV)"
3069:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
1828:
here, and challenge the IP user to look closer behind Stamets' marketing strategy of his mycologist reputation. The title
3134:
Thanks for identifying two sources. The second is just relaying Stamets own announcement, so I don't think it is helpful.
745:
596:
135:
4338:
I used the 2013 Discover article to state his marriage to Yao. That is the only source available for his personal life.
3959:
Stamets is a cheese sandwich, Knowledge (XXG) would say he is a cheese sandwich, then argue about whether to link it to
2963:
https://exponential.singularityu.org/medicine/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2019/11/Exponential-Medicine-2019-Agenda-v9.pdf
2923:
It's not what I wrote. This article has a history of COI and SOAP problems, and Stamets has made many FRINGE claims. --
2489:", comprise a "neurological network" that can communicate with humans, have "intelligence", and are a "defense against
1140:
Trimarco and Yes! Magazine 'rigorously '? Are these somehow more rigorous than the New York Times and Nature Magazine?
2525:
On Knowledge (XXG), we don't give light to charlatans without using prominent caveats, such as in the articles of the
2077:, both of whom would have spent 10+ years earning degrees in biology/mycology and scientific careers over 2-3 decades
190:
2871:- Stamets received an award for "Contributions to Amateur Mycology" from the North American Mycological Association.
4300:
sources yet for the second divorce. (The second divorce is too recent to be included in Ancestry.com data sources).
4128:
I hope other Knowledge (XXG) editors will help me restore the "Personal Life" section with the corrections I added.
3197:
2733:
I find it strange that there's a push to call him a mycologist when there's no mention of his running a fungi farm.
2614:- first paragraph of the intro describing Stamets as a mycologist. Actually, it's difficult finding any source that
3412:
2859:- Stamets is involved in multiple NIH-funded clinical studies on HIV treatments using fungi as adjunct therapies.
1999:
1000:
202:
185:
3767:
Since we don't mention his business anywhere else, I suppose it's ok in the lede. I've restored it to the lede. --
3213:
He holds a patent with celebrity doctor Andrew Weil for a mushroom extract used in an anti-inflammatory skin cream
970:
244:
109:
4118:, above. He/she/they never replied to the complaints of the original poster nor justified the reversion action.
4003:
3939:
2086:: in the pseudoscience of Stamets' speeches and business, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a
1507:
1048:
2421:. The focus should indeed be more on what he does rather than title, but that's better left for normal editing.
213:
4361:
4326:
4217:
4177:
4133:
4020:
3882:
3713:
3650:
2675:
3668:
2499:
in this RfC comment (mycelia are related to dark matter, his mushroom hat is medicinal, mushrooms cure cancer)
466:
293:
129:
4270:
3999:
3272:
3232:
3186:
3120:
2788:
Past consensus means little in the best of circumstances. There are clear FRINGE, COI, and SOAP issues here.
2572:
2456:
2313:
1937:
1909:
1880:
1812:
1243:
1165:
So that returns the responsibility to you or others to provide academic proof that he is a mycologist. Some
3931:
3078:
I read through the edit history for this page, and noticed that information about patents had been removed.
1016:
996:
828:
802:
3935:
3479:
3381:
3040:
3006:
2972:
2913:
2898:
2836:
2779:
2658:
2520:
2426:
2133:
2036:
1688:
1613:
1520:. Stamets does promote mushroom supplements, and definitely has unorthodox views, some of which fall into
1383:
1366:
1316:
1285:
1267:
3629:
added paragraph about Stamets' passion for preserving, cloning, and protecting mushrooms (with reference)
3453:
3319:
2502:
1088:
who would have no academic credentials to be called a "doctor". For Stamets and his supplement business,
125:
55:
4049:
3287:
2865:- Stamets received an honorary Doctorate of Science (D.Sc.) degree from the College of Natural Medicine
2335:
1697:
While I understand that verifiability does not mean it will be included, the three sources I mentioned (
1552:
984:
899:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
512:
on Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
4192:
4064:
3859:
3828:
3377:
3246:
So if we ever have a section on his research, that section might footnote that he has a few patents. --
3095:
As it turns out, there are mentions of his patents in reliable sources. So I included this on the page:
3036:
3002:
2968:
2909:
2894:
1379:
1362:
1312:
1281:
1263:
70:
4045:
2571:
scams and mushroom products advertised with outlandish, unproven health properties; 2) biased towards
1012:
980:
3867:
3809:
3758:
3688:
3465:
3349:
2947:
2758:
2636:
1533:
1486:
1458:
1145:
1078:
1064:
632:
254:. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
4253:
3851:
3820:
2874:- Stamets was invited to deliver the Ted talk "Paul Stamets on 6 Ways Mushrooms Can Save the World"
2767:
2624:
Paul E. Stamets, DSc (Hon) mycologist, author and advocate of bioremediation and medicinal mushrooms
2165:
1229:
In February of 2010, Paul received the President’s Award from the Society of Ecological Restoration.
275:
175:
4357:
4322:
4243:
4213:
4173:
4129:
3878:
3646:
3579:
Your assumptions about other editors, especially with no evidence, is inappropriate. Please review
2877:- TEDMED talk invited Stamets to deliver "Is the world ready for a Medical Mushroom Mystery Tour?"
2694:
2671:
2400:
2016:
1998:. While a PhD is now the usual route to expertise in a scientific field, it is not the only route.
1986:
1971:
1485:
published in Nature Scientific Reports (2) discovered and named several mushroom species including
1441:
565:
161:
3584:
2482:
2374:
2351:
2148:
2091:
1596:
1521:
480:
452:
4282:
4261:
3563:
3492:
2718:
2373:
that a number of editors, even when supporting using this title for the man, have alluded to the
2161:
2083:
1571:
258:.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see
218:
3786:
3664:
2473:
to applaud his discoveries, showing outrageously how "mushrooms can save the world" (reminds of
1429:
The lead sentence should describe the person as they are commonly described in reliable sources.
1202:
From a quick search about credentials, this is what I found: Stamets was honored with the 2013
1163:"The onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is upon those seeking to include disputed content."
616:
585:
420:
251:
3626:
added website of organization/company founded by Stamets, both in infobox and in External links
396:
3417:
2829:
2775:
2654:
2576:
2550:
2445:
2422:
2126:
2057:
2053:
2029:
1758:
1684:
1609:
51:
4187:
3855:
3824:
3580:
2474:
2360:
2263:
calling her an actress. The sources say Kunis is an actress, she is verifiably an actress. -
2153:
2100:
1775:
1675:
1591:
1154:
1132:
1109:
4314:
I will go ahead and revert back to my edit version and make changes and corrections you and
3283:
2526:
2331:
1841:
1548:
350:
215:
4238:
4060:
3854:
is inapplicable as there are multiple citations which prove that this is the company name.
3680:
3573:
2558:
2214:
1328:
1178:
is needed with proof that he has science-verified credentials to be called a mycologist. --
1175:
1136:
4072:
3974:
Multiple independent reliable sources identify Stamets as a mycologist so Knowledge (XXG)
3960:
3863:
3805:
3754:
3684:
3461:
2943:
2754:
2627:
2290:
1529:
1454:
1141:
1074:
1060:
141:
4353:
4308:
4297:
4293:
4257:
4234:
4144:
4015:
institution or ideology gets to gatekeep "doing science" with its own credential system.
3672:
2585:
2364:
2144:
1525:
1472:
4063:
and suggest specific changes to the article. Controversy sections are to be avoided per
2074:
4343:
4200:
4152:
3899:
3840:
3794:
3772:
3740:
3721:
3703:
3599:
3507:
3502:
I specifically asked for detailed biographies. The "mycologist" discussion is above. --
3483:
3437:
3400:
3376:
I think at a minimum we should include the patent that the Nature paper is based upon.
3251:
3142:
3055:
3020:
2987:
2928:
2814:
2797:
2742:
2697:
2594:
2554:
2538:
2530:
2511:
2386:
2173:
2108:
2012:
1967:
1853:
1784:
1438:
1301:
1183:
1121:
1116:
unless or until a reputable academic, professional, or government source says he is. --
3979:
3975:
3282:
research, it should rest on content published in peer-reviewed journals, not patents.
2356:
2250:(among others) do not merely mention at some point that Stamets is a mycologist, they
1767:
1680:
1648:
1097:
4378:
4237:
request) Mentions in secondary sources are normally how we determine if something is
3559:
3488:
2737:
change to the lede seems a good step toward identifying what he does for a living. --
2714:
2618:
describe him as a mycologist. A couple found through Google Scholar (out of many) -
2568:
2062:
1901:
1567:
1517:
1482:
1277:
1082:
1056:
1052:
645:
2620:
Paul Stamets...has been a mycologist and mushroom enthusiast for more than 30 years.
3215:... When he had carpenter ants in his house, he figured he’d try mycelium on them.
2359:
is not in itself sufficient to justify inclusion of particular claim or label (see
2066:
2003:
1475:
references use the descriptor, and the notable work he has done involves mushrooms.
1238:
So, Stamets is clearly a part of the academic and scientific mycology communities.
496:
24:
759:
4311:
sources. I view this court as a placeholder until better source(s) can be found.
2567:. Paraphrasing, Knowledge (XXG) is 1) biased towards science, and biased against
1683:
policy, and we already have solutions that negate the need for this RfC anyways.
3832:
2095:
1863:
Mushrooms have been used in traditional healing practices for quite a long time.
737:
4165:
Yes, this information has been widely known and made public by Stamets himself.
2619:
1215:
816:
791:
334:
306:
4068:
3781:
3158:
2850:- Stamats is an editor for the International Journal of Medicinal Mushrooms.
2147:
source defining that a mycologist is an informal title for hobbyists equal in
1717:
gives no other identity to Stamets than "mycologist Paul Stamets". Similarly,
727:
622:
486:
340:
3207:"Stamets, 55, neither works for a university nor has an advanced degree, but
965:
to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
4339:
4315:
4196:
4148:
4122:
4111:
4091:
3895:
3836:
3790:
3768:
3736:
3717:
3699:
3595:
3553:
3544:
3536:
3528:
3520:
3503:
3433:
3396:
3262:
3247:
3138:
3051:
3016:
2983:
2924:
2810:
2793:
2738:
2590:
2546:
2534:
2515:
2486:
2169:
2119:
2104:
2008:
1920:
1891:
1849:
1803:
1780:
1771:
1297:
1194:
1179:
1117:
1085:
4125:
will reply to this section and explain & justify the reversion action.
3623:
changed Stamets' birthplace in the infobox, as per existing English article
3217:
He got a patent for a pesticide that attracts the bugs to a natural poison.
1725:
labels him as "Paul Stamets, mycologist and Fungi Perfecti owner." For the
883:
862:
644:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
4114:
has a history of unwarrented and capricious reversions on this page. See
2078:
1453:
Should the first paragraph of the intro describe Stamets as a mycologist?
1203:
719:
4083:
Updated marriage history was reverted, labeled "Trivial" by Senior Editor
3968:
2690:
2580:
2542:
2490:
2087:
1962:
1101:
569:
3712:
And the many policy-based concerns presented earlier on your talk page (
1199:
And yet, do any reliable sources refer to Stamets as primarily a shaman?
556:
217:
4249:
3480:
https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2019/01/28/mushrooms-fungi-disease-bees
3452:
Most of the sources in the article are heavily focused on Stamets. The
4088:
interview article about him, published in Discovery Magazine in 2013.
3964:
2308:
is a basic and important principle to how Knowledge (XXG) functions.
1171:
1105:
4365:
4347:
4330:
4275:
4221:
4204:
4181:
4156:
4137:
4076:
4053:
4024:
4007:
3992:
3947:
3903:
3894:
Meanwhile, can someone find a reference verifying his birthplace? --
3886:
3871:
3844:
3813:
3798:
3776:
3762:
3744:
3725:
3707:
3692:
3654:
3603:
3567:
3511:
3496:
3469:
3441:
3404:
3385:
3291:
3276:
3255:
3236:
3190:
3146:
3124:
3059:
3044:
3024:
3010:
2991:
2976:
2951:
2932:
2917:
2902:
2841:
2818:
2801:
2783:
2762:
2746:
2722:
2703:
2679:
2662:
2645:
2598:
2460:
2430:
2403:
2339:
2317:
2295:
2273:
2227:
2177:
2138:
2112:
2041:
2020:
1975:
1941:
1913:
1884:
1857:
1816:
1788:
1739:
1692:
1665:
1617:
1575:
1556:
1537:
1462:
1447:
1387:
1370:
1353:
1320:
1305:
1289:
1271:
1247:
1187:
1149:
1125:
1068:
3180:
So again, some mention about patents, as well as research projects.
2099:
mycologist, but there is no rigorous peer-review to call him that (
1093:
370:. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
4256:. The divorce court record reference is problematic since that is
2847:
Support: The inclusion of the descriptor “mycologist” is obvious:
1902:
Extracts of Polypore Mushroom Mycelia Reduce Viruses in Honey Bees
1709:) don't merely mention it in passing, it's their primary -- their
1483:
Extracts of Polypore Mushroom Mycelia Reduce Viruses in Honey Bees
509:
2693:, which makes him a mycologist regardless of an official degree.
4115:
3640:
Updated Stamets' bibliography, which was missing several titles
2493:" (globally eradicated in 1980), among other bizarre delusions
1104:
is a formal academic discipline and subdivision of biology (or
838:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs
2853:- Stamets has published a mycological related paper in Nature
2363:) and that the label might be omitted, even if arising out of
2350:
as others have noted already, at the end of the day this is a
2202:(among others) that he is a mycologist. Are you really saying
1802:
It's hard for me to understand statements like the above from
950:
269:
250:
from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
227:
219:
15:
3789:. If it must be mentioned, it can be in the external link. --
1996:
Gordon and Tina Wasson award (for nontraditional mycologists)
1807:
business as well as educational courses for many years now.
758:
718:
555:
419:
395:
4400:
High-importance biography (arts and entertainment) articles
3050:
I'd expect the result of this RfC will be to include it. --
1331:
and restore the label used by independent reliable sources.
909:
Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Altered States of Consciousness
1425:
which is not a criterion for describing an article subject
963:
contributors may be personally or professionally connected
4415:
High-importance biography (science and academia) articles
2982:
That's not remotely independent, but simple publicity. --
841:
Template:WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs
4505:
Low-importance Altered States of Consciousness articles
4335:
2734:
2498:
2418:
2414:
1757:
and for the reasons presented in these RfC comments by
1754:
1605:
4147:
sources, then provide one or more for both marriages.
1844:(see diverse other false health claims under the tab,
1081:. He is a hobbyist focused on a subject, similar to a
160:
4143:
If this information is widely known and published by
2495:
presented in the 2013 Discover article and elsewhere,
1421:
should describe the article subject as a "mycologist"
1089:
3484:
http://www.thestory.org/stories/2010-08/mushroom-man
1401:
The following discussion is an archived record of a
1280:. Do I just link to the Nature article as a source?
912:
Template:WikiProject Altered States of Consciousness
895:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
508:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
4395:
C-Class biography (arts and entertainment) articles
1842:
here for several elaborate, unproven brain benefits
1800:
Stamets is a professional and is widely recognized.
1674:Except that doesn't address the main policy issue.
1411:
No further edits should be made to this discussion.
174:
3115:Coincidence? Or bias? Any other thoughts? Thanks.
3080:The editor in question stated in the edit summary:
1528:criticism than removal of well referenced content.
1278:https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-32194-8
1057:https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-32194-8
4460:C-Class United States articles of High-importance
4410:C-Class biography (science and academia) articles
3862:are essays and do not in any way dictate content.
2507:Pollan sensed the implausible grandiose theories.
2056:, your description of Stamets' reputation in the
1394:RfC about description of Paul Stamets in the lede
1174:and supplement marketer than he is a mycologist.
4500:C-Class Altered States of Consciousness articles
4321:Hopefully, this resolves the editorial dispute.
826:, a project which is currently considered to be
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
4162:his second marriage. Not sure about the first.
3074:information about patents unnecessarily deleted
2967:Described as "the world's leading mycologist"
2579:, and biased against supplements advertised to
1959:of course. The article's subject is clearly an
1419:There is a clear consensus below that the lede
824:WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs
3677:Knowledge (XXG):Dispute resolution noticeboard
2862:- Stamets has obtained fungi-related patents.
3391:How do the detailed biographies describe him?
2477:). The videos also display him as a lunatic (
2210:determinations should be superseded by yours?
1414:A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
8:
3671:when applied to content sourced to multiple
2156:is about consensus on reliable sources, but
844:Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs articles
4211:Knowledge (XXG):Dispute_resolution_requests
3679:, and, if talk page discussion is stuck, a
3614:Concerns about recent attempts at expansion
2503:Stamets himself admits his ideas are weird,
1770:for him as a mycologist (he apparently has
1025:) This user has contributed to the article.
1009:) This user has contributed to the article.
993:) This user has contributed to the article.
892:WikiProject Altered States of Consciousness
568:or someone who contributed to the field of
4405:Arts and entertainment work group articles
3929:
857:
786:
580:
447:
301:
4510:Articles edited by connected contributors
3413:"Meet Washington's spirited mushroom man"
2581:prey on vulnerable and gullible consumers
2158:no article source has critically assessed
1836:. Breaking the code of scientist conduct
685:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject United States
4420:Science and academia work group articles
915:Altered States of Consciousness articles
3310:
3198:Meet Washington’s spirited mushroom man
859:
788:
582:
449:
303:
273:
4455:High-importance United States articles
4285:for your analysis and recommendations.
2883:- Stamets authored six mycology books
1428:
1208:North American Mycological Association
4440:WikiProject Fungi mycologist articles
3714:User_talk:Revirvlkodlaku#Stamets_edit
3558:, you are not a Mycologist, are you?
3411:O'Hagan, Maureen (December 3, 2010).
3350:"Better Pest Control Through Biology"
1896:Anyhow, you seem concerned about the
407:the arts and entertainment work group
380:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Biography
7:
3267:Sounds good! Thanks for your input.
889:This article is within the scope of
822:This article is within the scope of
638:This article is within the scope of
502:This article is within the scope of
356:This article is within the scope of
4485:High-importance Washington articles
4385:Biography articles of living people
4352:Thank you. I have found additional
1826:Let's keep a healthy skeptical view
1772:a liberal arts degree with no major
835:Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs
798:Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs
431:the science and academia work group
292:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
4495:WikiProject United States articles
3982:states Stamets is a mycologist. -
3587:your comments about other editors.
688:Template:WikiProject United States
14:
4044:make a judgement if it is needed.
4036:deceptively void of information.
3348:Williams, Edmund (24 June 2011).
3159:How mushrooms will save the world
1204:Contributions to Amateur Mycology
522:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Fungi
50:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
3590:This discussion is to determine
3318:Isaacson, Andy (November 2009).
3200:(Seattle Times. 4 December 2010)
3065:The discussion above is closed.
3015:This source is a non-starter. --
1655:says it's a duck, its a duck. -
1092:, calling himself a mycologist (
954:
882:
861:
815:
790:
730:
625:
615:
584:
489:
479:
465:
451:
343:
333:
305:
274:
233:This article must adhere to the
201:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
4490:WikiProject Washington articles
2347:Weak support, with some caveats
1586:
1491:Michael Pollen for the Atlantic
929:This article has been rated as
906:Altered States of Consciousness
897:altered states of consciousness
869:Altered States of Consciousness
705:This article has been rated as
542:This article has been rated as
4450:C-Class United States articles
4435:High-importance Fungi articles
4425:WikiProject Biography articles
3594:to present the information. --
3458:2013 Discover Magazine article
3226:More mentions of patents here.
2704:05:01, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
2680:20:20, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
2663:05:01, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
2599:14:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
2521:example here under "Benefits".
2274:18:58, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
2228:17:03, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
2178:14:55, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
2139:15:14, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
2113:14:54, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
1992:Mycological Society of America
1755:my edit above under Mycologist
1647:, that's fine, but Stamets is
961:The following Knowledge (XXG)
383:Template:WikiProject Biography
1:
4209:I am going to submit this to
4168:Question: Why did you delete
3292:15:37, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
3277:20:26, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
3256:15:10, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
3237:05:57, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
3191:04:32, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
3147:04:01, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
3125:02:53, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
2959:Please add this to the list:
2819:20:34, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
2802:18:17, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
2784:16:46, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
2763:16:37, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
2747:16:34, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
2646:09:23, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
2461:01:19, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
2431:01:06, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
2404:01:02, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
2340:15:44, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
2318:01:58, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
2296:01:44, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
2075:university biologist, Hibbett
2042:17:41, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
2021:19:45, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
1976:04:31, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
1942:17:41, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
1914:17:24, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
1885:17:13, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
1858:16:16, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
1817:04:27, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
1789:23:31, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
1740:01:26, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
1693:17:32, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
1666:17:09, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
1618:16:29, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
1576:16:06, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
1557:16:01, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
1538:15:00, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
1463:14:53, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
1248:19:54, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
1188:22:48, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
1150:22:23, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
1126:21:32, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
1069:16:30, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
903:and see a list of open tasks.
767:This article is supported by
743:This article is supported by
516:and see a list of open tasks.
428:This article is supported by
404:This article is supported by
236:biographies of living persons
42:Put new text under old text.
4470:Low-importance Ohio articles
4077:15:52, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
4054:14:24, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
4031:Ad a "Controversies" section
4008:14:37, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
3904:00:18, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
3887:23:20, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
3872:22:58, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
3845:22:34, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
3814:22:10, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
3799:21:57, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
3777:20:26, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
3763:19:59, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
3745:19:08, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
3726:00:23, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
3708:00:17, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
3693:00:00, 4 December 2019 (UTC)
3655:23:09, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
3604:17:24, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
3568:02:28, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
3512:22:55, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
3497:21:06, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
3470:17:23, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
3442:15:15, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
3405:15:15, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
3386:00:29, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
3060:23:44, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
3045:23:27, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
3025:22:52, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
3011:22:38, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
2992:03:59, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
2977:02:32, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
2952:00:50, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
2933:01:13, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
2918:00:10, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
2903:22:12, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
2842:22:11, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
2723:20:54, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
1587:Talk:Paul_Stamets#Mycologist
1448:17:56, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
1388:02:43, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
1371:02:41, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
1354:03:17, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
1321:23:55, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
1306:23:36, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
1290:23:04, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
1272:16:20, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
1157:is part of the guideline on
1114:to not call him a mycologist
368:contribute to the discussion
4480:C-Class Washington articles
4356:sources and will add them.
4099:norm, please let me know.)
3993:22:42, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
3948:19:18, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
3209:he holds three U.S. patents
2668:Support with qualifications
2079:of peer-reviewed publishing
248:must be removed immediately
4526:
4445:WikiProject Fungi articles
4390:C-Class biography articles
3716:) appear to have merit. --
2000:Christiaan Hendrik Persoon
1928:We cannot rely on our own
935:project's importance scale
711:project's importance scale
548:project's importance scale
525:Template:WikiProject Fungi
4475:WikiProject Ohio articles
4292:I am still searching for
4188:an unverifiable statement
4025:03:55, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
3454:2009 Mother Jones article
3410:
3161:(Salon. 25 November 2002)
2160:Stamets as a mycologist (
1987:19 blog posts in 24 years
1753:for the reasons given in
928:
877:
810:
766:
726:
704:
641:WikiProject United States
610:
563:
541:
474:
427:
403:
328:
300:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
4366:22:17, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
4348:16:48, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
4331:16:16, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
4276:11:31, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
4222:04:43, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
4205:02:07, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
4182:00:58, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
4157:19:27, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
4138:19:14, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
3067:Please do not modify it.
2485:). He says mycelia are "
2470:biased towards science."
1408:Please do not modify it.
646:United States of America
564:This article is about a
3171:mycoremediation patent.
2573:evidence-based medicine
2549:(Dr. Oz), as a trusted
2306:WP:No original research
4430:C-Class Fungi articles
2094:). (Paraphrasing from
1595:someone involved with
770:WikiProject Washington
763:
723:
691:United States articles
560:
424:
400:
318:Arts and Entertainment
282:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
4465:C-Class Ohio articles
3320:"Return of the Fungi"
2824:closure requested at
975:neutral point of view
762:
722:
559:
423:
399:
359:WikiProject Biography
286:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
195:Auto-archiving period
100:Neutral point of view
3196:And another source:
1487:Psilocybe azurescens
1216:bio page for Stamets
967:conflict of interest
633:United States portal
322:Science and Academia
105:No original research
4244:Discover (magazine)
1606:just took a stab at
1403:request for comment
659:Articles Requested!
3336:and received four.
1873:The New York Times
764:
724:
561:
425:
401:
386:biography articles
288:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
4274:
4258:original research
4000:DouglasGlizzard24
3950:
3934:comment added by
3418:The Seattle Times
2577:clinical research
2058:Pacific Northwest
1930:original research
1514:Discover Magazine
1504:the Seattle Times
1495:Discover Magazine
1437:
1434:non-admin closure
1045:the Seattle Times
1031:
1030:
949:
948:
945:
944:
941:
940:
856:
855:
852:
851:
785:
784:
781:
780:
579:
578:
575:
574:
505:WikiProject Fungi
446:
445:
442:
441:
268:
267:
226:
225:
66:Assume good faith
43:
4517:
4268:
4266:
3991:
3988:
3985:
3557:
3548:
3540:
3532:
3524:
3429:
3427:
3425:
3369:
3368:
3362:
3360:
3345:
3339:
3338:
3332:
3330:
3315:
3266:
3157:Another source:
2839:
2834:
2643:
2634:
2449:
2293:
2272:
2269:
2266:
2226:
2223:
2220:
2213:Your borderline
2136:
2131:
2123:
2067:a "rural legend"
2039:
2034:
1924:
1895:
1738:
1735:
1732:
1664:
1661:
1658:
1431:
1410:
1352:
1349:
1346:
1198:
997:Mushroommedicine
958:
957:
951:
917:
916:
913:
910:
907:
886:
879:
878:
873:
865:
858:
846:
845:
842:
839:
836:
819:
812:
811:
806:
794:
787:
746:WikiProject Ohio
740:
735:
734:
733:
693:
692:
689:
686:
683:
635:
630:
629:
628:
619:
612:
611:
606:
603:
588:
581:
530:
529:
526:
523:
520:
499:
494:
493:
492:
483:
476:
475:
470:
469:
468:
463:
455:
448:
388:
387:
384:
381:
378:
364:join the project
353:
351:Biography portal
348:
347:
346:
337:
330:
329:
324:
309:
302:
285:
279:
278:
270:
256:this noticeboard
228:
220:
206:
205:
196:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
4525:
4524:
4520:
4519:
4518:
4516:
4515:
4514:
4375:
4374:
4336:With this edit,
4262:
4233:(Responding to
4085:
4033:
3989:
3986:
3983:
3961:cheese sandwich
3936:Philipp Mirzoev
3925:
3831:. Paraphrasing
3616:
3551:
3542:
3534:
3526:
3518:
3423:
3421:
3393:
3374:
3373:
3372:
3358:
3356:
3347:
3346:
3342:
3328:
3326:
3317:
3316:
3312:
3260:
3076:
3071:
3070:
2905:
2837:
2830:
2731:
2637:
2628:
2443:
2291:
2270:
2267:
2264:
2224:
2221:
2218:
2134:
2127:
2117:
2037:
2030:
1918:
1889:
1736:
1733:
1730:
1662:
1659:
1656:
1518:Nature Magazine
1450:
1406:
1396:
1350:
1347:
1344:
1212:Huffington Post
1206:award from the
1192:
1167:credible source
1053:Nature Magazine
1041:
955:
914:
911:
908:
905:
904:
871:
843:
840:
837:
834:
833:
800:
775:High-importance
736:
731:
729:
707:High-importance
690:
687:
684:
681:
680:
679:
665:Become a Member
631:
626:
624:
605:High‑importance
604:
594:
544:High-importance
527:
524:
521:
518:
517:
495:
490:
488:
464:
462:High‑importance
461:
436:High-importance
412:High-importance
385:
382:
379:
376:
375:
349:
344:
342:
315:
283:
222:
221:
216:
193:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
4523:
4521:
4513:
4512:
4507:
4502:
4497:
4492:
4487:
4482:
4477:
4472:
4467:
4462:
4457:
4452:
4447:
4442:
4437:
4432:
4427:
4422:
4417:
4412:
4407:
4402:
4397:
4392:
4387:
4377:
4376:
4373:
4372:
4371:
4370:
4369:
4368:
4358:Russell Thomas
4323:Russell Thomas
4319:
4312:
4305:
4301:
4290:
4286:
4231:
4230:
4229:
4228:
4227:
4226:
4225:
4224:
4214:Russell Thomas
4174:Russell Thomas
4166:
4163:
4130:Russell Thomas
4084:
4081:
4080:
4079:
4032:
4029:
4028:
4027:
4017:69.113.166.178
4012:
4011:
4010:
3972:
3956:
3924:
3920:
3919:
3918:
3917:
3916:
3915:
3914:
3913:
3912:
3911:
3910:
3909:
3908:
3907:
3906:
3892:
3847:
3801:
3733:
3732:
3731:
3730:
3729:
3728:
3710:
3669:WP:IDONTLIKEIT
3642:
3641:
3638:
3634:
3630:
3627:
3624:
3615:
3612:
3611:
3610:
3609:
3608:
3607:
3606:
3588:
3577:
3475:
3474:
3473:
3472:
3447:
3446:
3445:
3444:
3392:
3389:
3371:
3370:
3340:
3309:
3308:
3304:
3303:
3302:
3301:
3300:
3299:
3298:
3297:
3296:
3295:
3294:
3227:
3223:
3222:
3221:
3220:
3202:
3201:
3181:
3177:
3176:
3175:
3174:
3163:
3162:
3154:
3153:
3152:
3151:
3150:
3149:
3135:
3110:
3109:
3106:
3105:
3104:
3103:
3096:
3092:
3091:
3090:
3089:
3088:
3081:
3079:
3075:
3072:
3064:
3063:
3062:
3032:
3031:
3030:
3029:
3028:
3027:
2995:
2994:
2957:
2956:
2955:
2954:
2936:
2935:
2893:
2845:
2844:
2832:Blue Rasberry
2807:
2806:
2805:
2804:
2789:
2786:
2730:
2727:
2726:
2725:
2707:
2706:
2683:
2682:
2672:David Eppstein
2665:
2648:
2608:
2607:
2606:
2605:
2604:
2603:
2602:
2601:
2539:Luigi di Bella
2531:Joseph Mercola
2523:
2509:
2497:and mentioned
2436:
2435:
2434:
2433:
2407:
2406:
2380:
2379:
2369:
2368:
2343:
2342:
2323:
2322:
2321:
2320:
2299:
2298:
2283:
2282:
2281:
2280:
2279:
2278:
2277:
2276:
2261:New York Times
2244:New York Times
2232:
2231:
2230:
2211:
2208:New York Times
2196:New York Times
2129:Blue Rasberry
2045:
2044:
2032:Blue Rasberry
2023:
1979:
1978:
1953:
1952:
1951:
1950:
1949:
1948:
1947:
1946:
1945:
1944:
1927:
1899:
1874:
1869:
1864:
1820:
1819:
1801:
1792:
1791:
1747:
1746:
1745:
1744:
1743:
1742:
1727:New York Times
1703:New York Times
1669:
1668:
1633:New York Times
1621:
1620:
1601:
1600:
1579:
1578:
1560:
1559:
1541:
1540:
1499:
1498:
1477:
1476:
1451:
1418:
1417:
1416:
1397:
1395:
1392:
1391:
1390:
1374:
1373:
1357:
1356:
1340:New York Times
1334:In this case,
1332:
1309:
1308:
1259:
1258:
1257:
1256:
1255:
1254:
1253:
1252:
1251:
1250:
1236:
1235:
1234:
1230:
1227:
1223:
1213:
1200:
1090:Fungi Perfecti
1040:
1037:
1035:
1029:
1028:
1027:
1026:
1010:
994:
959:
947:
946:
943:
942:
939:
938:
931:Low-importance
927:
921:
920:
918:
901:the discussion
887:
875:
874:
872:Low‑importance
866:
854:
853:
850:
849:
847:
820:
808:
807:
795:
783:
782:
779:
778:
765:
755:
754:
751:Low-importance
742:
741:
725:
715:
714:
703:
697:
696:
694:
678:
677:
672:
667:
662:
655:
653:Template Usage
649:
637:
636:
620:
608:
607:
589:
577:
576:
573:
572:
562:
552:
551:
540:
534:
533:
531:
528:Fungi articles
514:the discussion
501:
500:
484:
472:
471:
456:
444:
443:
440:
439:
426:
416:
415:
402:
392:
391:
389:
355:
354:
338:
326:
325:
310:
298:
297:
291:
280:
266:
265:
261:this help page
245:poorly sourced
231:
224:
223:
214:
212:
211:
208:
207:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
4522:
4511:
4508:
4506:
4503:
4501:
4498:
4496:
4493:
4491:
4488:
4486:
4483:
4481:
4478:
4476:
4473:
4471:
4468:
4466:
4463:
4461:
4458:
4456:
4453:
4451:
4448:
4446:
4443:
4441:
4438:
4436:
4433:
4431:
4428:
4426:
4423:
4421:
4418:
4416:
4413:
4411:
4408:
4406:
4403:
4401:
4398:
4396:
4393:
4391:
4388:
4386:
4383:
4382:
4380:
4367:
4363:
4359:
4355:
4351:
4350:
4349:
4345:
4341:
4337:
4334:
4333:
4332:
4328:
4324:
4320:
4317:
4313:
4310:
4306:
4302:
4299:
4295:
4291:
4287:
4284:
4283:Novem Linguae
4280:
4279:
4278:
4277:
4272:
4267:
4265:
4264:Novem Linguae
4259:
4255:
4251:
4246:
4245:
4240:
4236:
4223:
4219:
4215:
4212:
4208:
4207:
4206:
4202:
4198:
4194:
4189:
4185:
4184:
4183:
4179:
4175:
4171:
4167:
4164:
4160:
4159:
4158:
4154:
4150:
4146:
4142:
4141:
4140:
4139:
4135:
4131:
4126:
4124:
4119:
4117:
4113:
4108:
4104:
4100:
4096:
4093:
4089:
4082:
4078:
4074:
4070:
4066:
4062:
4058:
4057:
4056:
4055:
4051:
4047:
4041:
4037:
4030:
4026:
4022:
4018:
4013:
4009:
4005:
4001:
3996:
3995:
3994:
3981:
3977:
3973:
3970:
3966:
3962:
3957:
3955:requirements.
3953:
3952:
3951:
3949:
3945:
3941:
3937:
3933:
3921:
3905:
3901:
3897:
3893:
3890:
3889:
3888:
3884:
3880:
3875:
3874:
3873:
3869:
3865:
3861:
3857:
3853:
3848:
3846:
3842:
3838:
3834:
3830:
3826:
3822:
3817:
3816:
3815:
3811:
3807:
3802:
3800:
3796:
3792:
3788:
3783:
3780:
3779:
3778:
3774:
3770:
3766:
3765:
3764:
3760:
3756:
3751:
3750:
3749:
3748:
3747:
3746:
3742:
3738:
3727:
3723:
3719:
3715:
3711:
3709:
3705:
3701:
3696:
3695:
3694:
3690:
3686:
3682:
3678:
3674:
3670:
3666:
3661:
3660:
3659:
3658:
3657:
3656:
3652:
3648:
3639:
3635:
3631:
3628:
3625:
3622:
3621:
3620:
3613:
3605:
3601:
3597:
3593:
3589:
3586:
3582:
3578:
3575:
3571:
3570:
3569:
3565:
3561:
3555:
3546:
3538:
3530:
3522:
3515:
3514:
3513:
3509:
3505:
3501:
3500:
3499:
3498:
3494:
3490:
3485:
3481:
3471:
3467:
3463:
3459:
3455:
3451:
3450:
3449:
3448:
3443:
3439:
3435:
3431:
3430:
3420:
3419:
3414:
3409:
3408:
3407:
3406:
3402:
3398:
3390:
3388:
3387:
3383:
3379:
3367:
3355:
3351:
3344:
3341:
3337:
3325:
3321:
3314:
3311:
3307:
3293:
3289:
3285:
3280:
3279:
3278:
3274:
3270:
3269:65.60.163.223
3264:
3259:
3258:
3257:
3253:
3249:
3245:
3244:
3243:
3242:
3241:
3240:
3239:
3238:
3234:
3230:
3229:65.60.163.223
3225:
3218:
3214:
3210:
3206:
3205:
3204:
3203:
3199:
3195:
3194:
3193:
3192:
3188:
3184:
3183:65.60.163.223
3179:
3172:
3167:
3166:
3165:
3164:
3160:
3156:
3155:
3148:
3144:
3140:
3136:
3133:
3132:
3131:
3130:
3129:
3128:
3127:
3126:
3122:
3118:
3117:65.60.163.223
3114:
3101:
3100:
3099:
3098:
3097:
3094:
3086:
3085:
3084:
3083:
3082:
3073:
3068:
3061:
3057:
3053:
3049:
3048:
3047:
3046:
3042:
3038:
3026:
3022:
3018:
3014:
3013:
3012:
3008:
3004:
2999:
2998:
2997:
2996:
2993:
2989:
2985:
2981:
2980:
2979:
2978:
2974:
2970:
2965:
2964:
2960:
2953:
2949:
2945:
2940:
2939:
2938:
2937:
2934:
2930:
2926:
2922:
2921:
2920:
2919:
2915:
2911:
2904:
2900:
2896:
2892:
2888:
2884:
2881:
2878:
2875:
2872:
2869:
2866:
2863:
2860:
2857:
2854:
2851:
2848:
2843:
2840:
2835:
2833:
2827:
2823:
2822:
2821:
2820:
2816:
2812:
2803:
2799:
2795:
2790:
2787:
2785:
2781:
2777:
2773:
2769:
2766:
2765:
2764:
2760:
2756:
2751:
2750:
2749:
2748:
2744:
2740:
2736:
2728:
2724:
2720:
2716:
2712:
2709:
2708:
2705:
2702:
2699:
2696:
2692:
2688:
2685:
2684:
2681:
2677:
2673:
2669:
2666:
2664:
2660:
2656:
2652:
2649:
2647:
2644:
2642:
2641:
2635:
2633:
2632:
2625:
2621:
2617:
2613:
2610:
2609:
2600:
2596:
2592:
2587:
2582:
2578:
2574:
2570:
2569:pseudoscience
2566:
2565:
2563:
2556:
2552:
2548:
2544:
2540:
2536:
2532:
2528:
2524:
2522:
2517:
2513:
2510:
2508:
2504:
2500:
2496:
2492:
2488:
2484:
2480:
2476:
2471:
2469:
2464:
2463:
2462:
2458:
2454:
2453:65.60.163.223
2447:
2442:
2441:
2440:
2439:
2438:
2437:
2432:
2428:
2424:
2420:
2416:
2413:content like
2411:
2410:
2409:
2408:
2405:
2402:
2401:
2399:
2398:
2395:
2392:
2389:
2382:
2381:
2376:
2371:
2370:
2366:
2362:
2358:
2353:
2348:
2345:
2344:
2341:
2337:
2333:
2328:
2325:
2324:
2319:
2315:
2311:
2310:65.60.163.223
2307:
2303:
2302:
2301:
2300:
2297:
2294:
2288:
2285:
2284:
2275:
2262:
2258:
2253:
2249:
2245:
2241:
2240:Seattle Times
2237:
2233:
2229:
2216:
2212:
2209:
2205:
2201:
2197:
2193:
2192:Seattle Times
2189:
2185:
2181:
2180:
2179:
2175:
2171:
2167:
2163:
2162:SummerPhDv2.0
2159:
2155:
2150:
2146:
2142:
2141:
2140:
2137:
2132:
2130:
2121:
2116:
2115:
2114:
2110:
2106:
2102:
2097:
2093:
2089:
2085:
2084:SummerPhDv2.0
2080:
2076:
2072:
2068:
2064:
2063:Woozle effect
2059:
2055:
2052:
2049:
2048:
2047:
2046:
2043:
2040:
2035:
2033:
2027:
2024:
2022:
2018:
2014:
2010:
2005:
2001:
1997:
1993:
1988:
1984:
1981:
1980:
1977:
1973:
1969:
1965:
1964:
1958:
1955:
1954:
1943:
1939:
1935:
1934:65.60.163.223
1931:
1925:
1922:
1917:
1916:
1915:
1911:
1907:
1906:65.60.163.223
1903:
1897:
1893:
1888:
1887:
1886:
1882:
1878:
1877:65.60.163.223
1872:
1868:controversial
1867:
1862:
1861:
1860:
1859:
1855:
1851:
1847:
1843:
1839:
1835:
1831:
1827:
1824:
1823:
1822:
1821:
1818:
1814:
1810:
1809:65.60.163.223
1805:
1799:
1797:
1794:
1793:
1790:
1786:
1782:
1777:
1773:
1769:
1764:
1760:
1756:
1752:
1749:
1748:
1741:
1728:
1724:
1723:Seattle Times
1720:
1716:
1712:
1708:
1704:
1700:
1696:
1695:
1694:
1690:
1686:
1682:
1677:
1673:
1672:
1671:
1670:
1667:
1654:
1650:
1646:
1642:
1638:
1634:
1630:
1629:Seattle Times
1626:
1623:
1622:
1619:
1615:
1611:
1607:
1603:
1602:
1598:
1593:
1588:
1584:
1581:
1580:
1577:
1573:
1569:
1565:
1562:
1561:
1558:
1554:
1550:
1546:
1543:
1542:
1539:
1535:
1531:
1527:
1523:
1519:
1515:
1512:
1509:
1505:
1501:
1500:
1496:
1492:
1488:
1484:
1479:
1478:
1474:
1470:
1467:
1466:
1465:
1464:
1460:
1456:
1449:
1446:
1443:
1440:
1435:
1430:
1426:
1422:
1415:
1412:
1409:
1404:
1399:
1398:
1393:
1389:
1385:
1381:
1376:
1375:
1372:
1368:
1364:
1359:
1358:
1355:
1341:
1337:
1333:
1330:
1325:
1324:
1323:
1322:
1318:
1314:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1294:
1293:
1292:
1291:
1287:
1283:
1279:
1274:
1273:
1269:
1265:
1249:
1245:
1241:
1240:65.60.163.223
1237:
1231:
1228:
1224:
1220:
1219:
1217:
1211:
1209:
1205:
1201:
1196:
1191:
1190:
1189:
1185:
1181:
1177:
1173:
1168:
1164:
1160:
1159:verifiability
1156:
1153:
1152:
1151:
1147:
1143:
1138:
1134:
1131:
1130:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1123:
1119:
1115:
1111:
1107:
1103:
1099:
1095:
1091:
1087:
1084:
1083:folk medicine
1080:
1076:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1054:
1050:
1046:
1038:
1036:
1033:
1024:
1021:
1018:
1014:
1011:
1008:
1005:
1002:
998:
995:
992:
989:
986:
982:
979:
978:
976:
972:
971:autobiography
968:
964:
960:
953:
952:
936:
932:
926:
923:
922:
919:
902:
898:
894:
893:
888:
885:
881:
880:
876:
870:
867:
864:
860:
848:
831:
830:
825:
821:
818:
814:
813:
809:
804:
799:
796:
793:
789:
776:
773:(assessed as
772:
771:
761:
757:
756:
752:
749:(assessed as
748:
747:
739:
728:
721:
717:
716:
712:
708:
702:
699:
698:
695:
682:United States
676:
673:
671:
668:
666:
663:
661:
660:
656:
654:
651:
650:
647:
643:
642:
634:
623:
621:
618:
614:
613:
609:
602:
598:
593:
592:United States
590:
587:
583:
571:
567:
558:
554:
553:
549:
545:
539:
536:
535:
532:
515:
511:
507:
506:
498:
487:
485:
482:
478:
477:
473:
460:
457:
454:
450:
437:
434:(assessed as
433:
432:
422:
418:
417:
413:
410:(assessed as
409:
408:
398:
394:
393:
390:
373:
372:documentation
369:
365:
361:
360:
352:
341:
339:
336:
332:
331:
327:
323:
319:
314:
311:
308:
304:
299:
295:
289:
281:
277:
272:
271:
263:
262:
257:
253:
249:
246:
242:
238:
237:
232:
230:
229:
210:
209:
204:
200:
192:
189:
187:
183:
182:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
4318:recommended.
4263:
4242:
4232:
4169:
4127:
4121:I hope that
4120:
4116:this section
4109:
4105:
4101:
4097:
4090:
4086:
4042:
4038:
4034:
3930:— Preceding
3926:
3753:advertising.
3734:
3643:
3617:
3591:
3476:
3422:. Retrieved
3416:
3394:
3378:Keithdyer101
3375:
3364:
3357:. Retrieved
3353:
3343:
3334:
3327:. Retrieved
3324:Mother Jones
3323:
3313:
3305:
3224:
3216:
3212:
3208:
3178:
3169:
3111:
3107:
3093:
3077:
3066:
3037:Keithdyer101
3033:
3003:Keithdyer101
2969:Keithdyer101
2966:
2961:
2958:
2910:Keithdyer101
2906:
2895:Keithdyer101
2889:
2885:
2882:
2879:
2876:
2873:
2870:
2867:
2864:
2861:
2858:
2855:
2852:
2849:
2846:
2831:
2808:
2776:Kingofaces43
2732:
2710:
2686:
2667:
2655:JonRichfield
2650:
2639:
2638:
2630:
2629:
2615:
2611:
2561:
2559:
2478:
2467:
2465:
2446:Kingofaces43
2423:Kingofaces43
2396:
2393:
2390:
2387:
2385:
2346:
2326:
2286:
2260:
2256:
2251:
2247:
2243:
2239:
2235:
2207:
2203:
2199:
2195:
2191:
2187:
2183:
2157:
2143:There is no
2128:
2071:USDA's Lodge
2054:Bluerasberry
2051:Perspective:
2050:
2031:
2025:
2004:Mayim Bialik
1994:'s inaugral
1982:
1960:
1956:
1845:
1837:
1833:
1829:
1825:
1795:
1762:
1759:Kingofaces43
1750:
1726:
1722:
1718:
1714:
1710:
1706:
1702:
1699:Seatle Times
1698:
1685:Kingofaces43
1652:
1644:
1640:
1636:
1632:
1628:
1624:
1610:Kingofaces43
1582:
1563:
1545:Weak support
1544:
1508:the NY Times
1468:
1452:
1420:
1413:
1407:
1400:
1380:Keithdyer101
1363:Keithdyer101
1339:
1335:
1313:Keithdyer101
1310:
1282:Keithdyer101
1275:
1264:Keithdyer101
1260:
1166:
1162:
1158:
1113:
1049:the NY Times
1042:
1034:
1032:
1019:
1003:
987:
962:
930:
890:
827:
768:
744:
706:
670:Project Talk
658:
639:
543:
503:
497:Fungi portal
429:
405:
357:
294:WikiProjects
259:
247:
240:
234:
198:
184:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
25:Paul Stamets
19:This is the
4304:businesses.
4193:WP:REFPUNCT
4065:WP:CSECTION
4046:Monteparnas
3860:WP:LUNATICS
3833:Jimbo Wales
3829:WP:LUNATICS
3359:5 September
3329:5 September
3284:David notMD
2551:"internist"
2535:radiologist
2527:con artists
2332:David notMD
2330:regulated.
2096:Jimmy Wales
1549:PraiseVivec
1013:Paulstamets
981:StametsClan
738:Ohio portal
148:free images
31:not a forum
4379:Categories
4289:included).
4281:Thank you
4254:WP:BLPNAME
3980:verifiably
3864:Dialectric
3852:WP:PROVEIT
3821:WP:PROVEIT
3806:Dialectric
3782:MOS:LEADNO
3755:Dialectric
3685:Dialectric
3462:Dialectric
3306:References
2944:Dialectric
2770:, (namely
2768:WP:SILENCE
2755:Dialectric
2729:Discussion
2631:Isaidnoway
2543:oncologist
2292:Meatsgains
2166:WP:REDFLAG
1963:mycologist
1898:reputation
1834:mycologist
1830:mycologist
1763:verifiably
1649:verifiably
1530:Dialectric
1455:Dialectric
1161:, stating
1142:Dialectric
1075:Dialectric
1061:Dialectric
1039:Mycologist
601:Washington
566:mycologist
4110:Finally,
3976:neutrally
3585:WP:REDACT
2698:WarKosign
2555:Guy Macon
2547:Mehmet Oz
2516:snake oil
2512:Snow Rise
2483:WP:QUACKS
2375:WP:fringe
2352:WP:WEIGHT
2149:WP:WEIGHT
2092:WP:QUACKS
2013:Plantdrew
2009:Mehmet Oz
1968:The Gnome
1838:just once
1597:WP:FRINGE
1522:WP:FRINGE
1445:(contrib)
1439:Eggishorn
1329:synthesis
1086:herbalist
377:Biography
313:Biography
252:libellous
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
3969:sandwich
3944:contribs
3932:unsigned
3923:science)
3879:werewolf
3787:WP:PROMO
3665:WP:NOTCV
3647:werewolf
3560:Yousavvy
3489:Yousavvy
3456:and the
3424:July 19,
2715:Yousavvy
2691:Mycology
2560:Yes, we
2491:smallpox
2487:sentient
2304:Agreed.
2259:and the
2248:Discover
2206:and the
2200:Discover
2065:, i.e.,
1961:amateur
1846:Benefits
1719:Discover
1233:science.
1222:others).
1102:Mycology
1023:contribs
1007:contribs
991:contribs
570:mycology
199:365Â days
186:Archives
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
4250:MOS:BIO
4059:Please
3856:WP:FLAT
3825:WP:FLAT
3581:WP:TALK
3572:Please
2711:Support
2687:Support
2651:Support
2616:doesn't
2612:Support
2557:wrote:
2541:as an "
2479:lunatic
2475:WP:FLAT
2361:WP:ONUS
2327:Support
2287:Support
2234:Again,
2154:WP:ONUS
2101:WP:ONUS
2026:Support
1983:Support
1957:Support
1796:Support
1776:WP:ONUS
1676:WP:ONUS
1625:Support
1592:WP:ONUS
1564:Support
1469:Support
1155:WP:ONUS
1133:WP:ONUS
1110:WP:ONUS
933:on the
829:defunct
803:defunct
709:on the
546:on the
284:C-class
154:WPÂ refs
142:scholar
4239:WP:DUE
4061:WP:FOC
3965:cheese
3681:WP:RFC
3574:WP:FOC
2838:(talk)
2640:(talk)
2564:biased
2545:", or
2533:as a "
2481:as in
2257:Nature
2252:define
2236:Nature
2215:WP:BLP
2204:Nature
2188:Nature
2135:(talk)
2038:(talk)
1751:Oppose
1715:Nature
1707:Nature
1653:Nature
1641:Nature
1637:Nature
1583:Oppose
1568:Nessie
1442:(talk)
1338:, the
1336:Nature
1214:has a
1210:. The
1176:WP:CON
1172:shaman
1137:WP:BRD
1106:botany
973:, and
675:Alerts
290:scale.
126:Google
4354:WP:RS
4309:WP:RS
4298:WP:RS
4294:WP:RS
4235:WP:3O
4145:WP:RS
4069:Hipal
3673:WP:RS
3354:Wired
3113:work.
2622:and
2586:WP:RS
2365:WP:RS
2184:their
2145:WP:RS
2103:). --
2088:quack
1526:WP:RS
1473:WP:RS
519:Fungi
510:Fungi
459:Fungi
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
4362:talk
4344:talk
4340:Zefr
4327:talk
4316:Zefr
4271:talk
4218:talk
4201:talk
4197:Zefr
4178:talk
4153:talk
4149:Zefr
4134:talk
4123:Zefr
4112:Zefr
4092:Zefr
4073:talk
4067:. --
4050:talk
4021:talk
4004:talk
3978:and
3967:and
3940:talk
3900:talk
3896:Ronz
3883:talk
3868:talk
3858:and
3841:talk
3837:Zefr
3827:and
3810:talk
3795:talk
3791:Zefr
3773:talk
3769:Ronz
3759:talk
3741:talk
3737:Ronz
3722:talk
3718:Ronz
3704:talk
3700:Ronz
3689:talk
3651:talk
3637:etc.
3633:etc.
3600:talk
3596:Ronz
3583:and
3564:talk
3554:Ronz
3545:Ronz
3537:Ronz
3529:Ronz
3521:Ronz
3508:talk
3504:Ronz
3493:talk
3466:talk
3438:talk
3434:Ronz
3426:2015
3401:talk
3397:Ronz
3382:talk
3361:2019
3331:2019
3288:talk
3273:talk
3263:Ronz
3252:talk
3248:Ronz
3233:talk
3187:talk
3143:talk
3139:Ronz
3121:talk
3056:talk
3052:Ronz
3041:talk
3021:talk
3017:Ronz
3007:talk
2988:talk
2984:Ronz
2973:talk
2948:talk
2929:talk
2925:Ronz
2914:talk
2899:talk
2815:talk
2811:Ronz
2798:talk
2794:Ronz
2780:talk
2772:this
2759:talk
2753:rfc.
2743:talk
2739:Ronz
2735:This
2719:talk
2676:talk
2659:talk
2595:talk
2591:Zefr
2505:and
2466:"We
2457:talk
2427:talk
2419:this
2415:this
2357:WP:V
2336:talk
2314:talk
2246:and
2198:and
2174:talk
2170:Zefr
2120:Zefr
2109:talk
2105:Zefr
2017:talk
1972:talk
1938:talk
1921:Zefr
1910:talk
1892:Zefr
1881:talk
1854:talk
1850:Zefr
1813:talk
1804:Zefr
1785:talk
1781:Zefr
1768:WP:V
1711:only
1689:talk
1681:WP:V
1643:and
1635:and
1614:talk
1572:talk
1553:talk
1534:talk
1516:and
1459:talk
1384:talk
1367:talk
1317:talk
1302:talk
1298:Zefr
1286:talk
1268:talk
1244:talk
1195:Zefr
1184:talk
1180:Zefr
1146:talk
1135:and
1122:talk
1118:Zefr
1098:WP:V
1094:here
1065:talk
1059:) .
1051:and
1017:talk
1001:talk
985:talk
701:High
597:Ohio
538:High
366:and
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
4170:all
3990:PhD
3987:mer
3984:Sum
3963:or
3592:how
2562:are
2537:",
2468:are
2417:or
2271:PhD
2268:mer
2265:Sum
2225:PhD
2222:mer
2219:Sum
2164:).
2073:or
1774:).
1737:PhD
1734:mer
1731:Sum
1663:PhD
1660:mer
1657:Sum
1645:NYT
1351:PhD
1348:mer
1345:Sum
1079:PhD
977:.
925:Low
241:BLP
176:TWL
4381::
4364:)
4346:)
4329:)
4241:.
4220:)
4203:)
4195:.
4180:)
4155:)
4136:)
4075:)
4052:)
4023:)
4006:)
3946:)
3942:•
3902:)
3885:)
3870:)
3843:)
3812:)
3797:)
3775:)
3761:)
3743:)
3724:)
3706:)
3698:--
3691:)
3653:)
3602:)
3566:)
3510:)
3495:)
3487:--
3468:)
3440:)
3415:.
3403:)
3384:)
3363:.
3352:.
3333:.
3322:.
3290:)
3275:)
3254:)
3235:)
3189:)
3145:)
3123:)
3058:)
3043:)
3023:)
3009:)
2990:)
2975:)
2950:)
2931:)
2916:)
2901:)
2828:.
2817:)
2800:)
2792:--
2782:)
2761:)
2745:)
2721:)
2678:)
2661:)
2597:)
2589:--
2553:.
2529:,
2501:.
2459:)
2429:)
2338:)
2316:)
2242:,
2238:,
2194:,
2190:,
2176:)
2111:)
2019:)
1974:)
1940:)
1912:)
1883:)
1856:)
1815:)
1798:-
1787:)
1779:--
1705:,
1701:,
1691:)
1631:,
1616:)
1608:.
1574:)
1555:)
1536:)
1506:,
1497:).
1461:)
1427::
1405:.
1386:)
1369:)
1319:)
1304:)
1288:)
1270:)
1246:)
1218::
1186:)
1148:)
1124:)
1067:)
1047:,
969:,
777:).
753:).
599:/
595::
438:).
414:).
320:/
316::
197::
156:)
54:;
4360:(
4342:(
4325:(
4273:)
4269:(
4216:(
4199:(
4176:(
4151:(
4132:(
4071:(
4048:(
4019:(
4002:(
3971:.
3938:(
3898:(
3881:(
3866:(
3839:(
3808:(
3793:(
3771:(
3757:(
3739:(
3720:(
3702:(
3687:(
3683:.
3649:(
3598:(
3576:.
3562:(
3556::
3552:@
3547::
3543:@
3539::
3535:@
3531::
3527:@
3523::
3519:@
3506:(
3491:(
3464:(
3436:(
3428:.
3399:(
3380:(
3286:(
3271:(
3265::
3261:@
3250:(
3231:(
3219:"
3185:(
3141:(
3119:(
3054:(
3039:(
3019:(
3005:(
2986:(
2971:(
2946:(
2927:(
2912:(
2897:(
2813:(
2796:(
2778:(
2757:(
2741:(
2717:(
2701:”
2695:“
2674:(
2657:(
2626:.
2593:(
2455:(
2448::
2444:@
2425:(
2397:w
2394:o
2391:n
2388:S
2334:(
2312:(
2172:(
2122::
2118:@
2107:(
2090:(
2015:(
1970:(
1936:(
1923::
1919:@
1908:(
1894::
1890:@
1879:(
1852:(
1811:(
1783:(
1687:(
1612:(
1570:(
1551:(
1532:(
1511:2
1489:(
1457:(
1436:)
1432:(
1382:(
1365:(
1315:(
1300:(
1284:(
1266:(
1242:(
1197::
1193:@
1182:(
1144:(
1120:(
1063:(
1020:·
1015:(
1004:·
999:(
988:·
983:(
937:.
832:.
805:)
801:(
713:.
550:.
374:.
296::
264:.
239:(
191:1
188::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
