Talk:Krüper's nuthatch/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 23:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi again, is this, too, a translation from the French? If so, could you please double-check if the translation is correct (see my hints at Talk:Giant_nuthatch) before I start here as well? Thanks. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 23:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I've dealt with the Giant Nuthatch now. I will check this entire article when the other one is already done and ping you when I'm finished. 2001:4455:1A9:E100:D491:33CD:C6AF:2C51 (talk) 01:44, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Quick note, this article references "Harrap", but there's no info for what that is within the article, so the Harv references are failing. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:27, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll deal with that tomorrow after translating everything again. 2001:4455:1A9:E100:187A:6121:3FA3:9FAD (talk) 11:59, 6 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi again Jens Lallensack, done fixing it. Although you might also check White-browed nuthatch. 2001:4455:1A9:E100:8F7:B4E2:14D5:58BA (talk) 03:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)


 * The bill is horn-gray with the base of the lower mandible and the culmen is grey-blue. – "being grey-blue"?
 * post-nuptial – please link all technical terms.
 * Nervous, it produces a rough – "When agitated"? Please check if this is correct, I just guess.
 * The song is a tuituituitui... nasal, alternating high and low notes, at variable rhythm.[13] – not a sentence, the different parts don't fit together; I don't know what this means.
 * The above are only some quick spot checks, telling me that the article still needs work since many translation errors are still left. May I asked you to
 * implement the changes we discussed at Talk:White-browed nuthatch/GA1; I see at least some of them applying here as well
 * Go through the article sentence-by-sentence and double-check if you use the correct terms and formulations, if everything is logical, and if all terms are linked at first mention? For the terms, both Wikipedia, especially the bird glossary, and the Wiktionary (are useful resources. Check if other articles use terms the way you do. Feel free to list all sentences here where you are unsure if they are correct, so we can discuss them. Thanks. --[[User:Jens Lallensack|Jens Lallensack] (talk) 13:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Jens Lallensack I did use the deeptranslator, but as a non-biologist, this is getting hard unfortunately. I think I'm giving up on this, unlike the other article that both you and FunkMonk reviewed. Feel free to close this nomination as "failed" if you think this article has still a lot of errors. 2001:4455:1A9:E100:F8B2:C524:76E0:4801 (talk) 00:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it was not my intention to ask for too much; I was trying to give guidance to allow you to improve your article by yourself. What about this: You simply do what you can, fixing the issues I have listed above, and fix issues we did already discuss at the other reviews (links to the bird gloss etc.). When you are done, I can give the article a copy edit, fixing grammar errors myself as I find them. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 09:54, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Jens Lallensack Don't apologize to me, that's what the reviewer does normally. I should be the one who needs to fix those grammar issues, so I think closing it would be fine. I'll renominate it once I've done fixing and rechecking the issues at the source soon. Really appreciate your help and time on the articles you've reviewed! 2001:4455:1A9:E100:2DC3:ED1C:9D14:9C66 (talk) 10:00, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, I will close it, then. But it's really hard to find and correct your own grammar mistakes. I think you need help. WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests is there for this reason, you can list the article there, but at the moment it may take a long time until someone picks it up. Alternatively, feel free to ping me before you re-nominate, and I can provide a copy edit for you. Such copy edits are really helpful to improve your own writing, if you carefully review what has been corrected. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 10:16, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, I will if it's ready, rather than waste the reviewer's time. Thanks for the help and for the information thou :). 2001:4455:1A9:E100:2DC3:ED1C:9D14:9C66 (talk) 10:22, 8 January 2022 (UTC)