Talk:Blue duck/GA2

GA review

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

---

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

Nominator: Sddarealone (talk · contribs) 19:04, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 21:21, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi there!

• You would need to drastically expand the lead (so that it properly summarizes the article), then remove the maintainance template.

• The pinkish-white bill has fleshy flaps of skin hanging from the sides of its tip. The beak is green at hatching and develops its final colour eight hours later. – Does not have a source.

• According to the IUCN, the blue duck is endangered due to its highly fragmented and shrinking population, and it is listed as Nationally Endangered in the New Zealand Threat Classification System. – Where is the cited source saying that it is listed Nationally Endangered in the New Zealand Threat Classification System? Maybe I overlook it.

• The blue duck is affected by threats which include predators both natural and introduced e.g., weka (natural), stoats (introduced) etc., man-made actions, environmental and weather conditions – needs rewrite (for example, grammar is off, "e.g." and "etc." are mutually redundant). "Man-made actions" is too unspecific (introducing those predators is also a man-made action".

• Early recovery efforts by scientists, field workers and volunteers have been summarised in a project sponsored by Genesis Energy – Why is it relevant that this company sponsored a project that provided a summary of efforts? Tell us more about those early efforts, not who sponsored the summary of it.

• Did you know that in the IUCN source ), you get a lot more information by expanding the respective sections (e.g., click on "threats in detail")? That should help to further develop the article.

• Article seems to be missing some basic information. For example, color of tip of beak (and the beak could be better described), iris color, color of legs, shape and color of eggs, anything about the nest

• highlighting male-male competition's role in shaping blue duck social dynamics – this nonsense is a clear sign of AI writing. After reading this, I checked the article history and saw that you attempted to clean-up an AI-generated article, which is commendable. However, this shows that the clean-up was not throughout. No offense, but it is incredibly difficult to clean-up AI stuff; in fact, if I were you, I would simply have deleted it all, and write from scratch. No reviewer want's to read AI-generated articles, and hard-to-spot source-text integrity issues are to be expected. Sorry for that, but I have to quick-fail this. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:21, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

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