Talk:Dhurbe

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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Dhurbe/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Kirti15 (talk · contribs) 07:58, 10 December 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Velayinosu (talk · contribs) 00:18, 14 December 2025 (UTC)

I'm going to fail this GA nomination. One issue is that practically none of the information in the lead is in the body of the article. The lead is supposed to summarize the main points of the body, but it currently is filled with information not in the body and doesn't discuss the things that are in the body. Another issue is that that "Conservationist views and critiques" section reads AI/LLM-like, for example em dashes are overused, a hallmark of AI/LLM text.

Some other minor points:

• 1. There shouldn't be spaces between periods and references at the ends of sentences.
• 2. The chart doesn't make a distinction between attacks and fatalities, which are two different things. The chart is also lacking references.
• 3. Ref 6 "Rhino census in Chitwan affected after a wild elephant attacks counting team (Nepal)" has a CS1 error.
• 4. Ref 16 says "Ram, A.K. et al. (2021). same.". You're re-using a reference, so just use the ref name= short reference form.
• 5. Ref 10 should be linked with an access date and other information
• 6. Many of the references are incomplete and missing information like the publisher or website of the source or access date.
• 7. Web links should have archive links.
• 8. References there are adjacent to each other should be in number order. E.g. currently "human-dominated landscapes. 14-15-11" should be "human-dominated landscapes.11-14-15".
• 9. Repetitive language in some parts, for example the 2nd paragraph in the current lead says "the elephant" numerous times when its name or he/him could be used for variation.
• 10. It's known to be male, so maybe don't refer to it as it, i.e. use he/him when pronouns are used.
• 11. The infobox says "Known for notorious behavior". This is uninformative.
• 12. Don't use curly “ ” quotation marks, use straight " ".

I did not check for verifiability because these issues were all apparent at a glance. A more thorough analysis may uncover other issues. Velayinosu (talk) 00:51, 14 December 2025 (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.