Talk:Madras Crocodile Bank Trust

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Madras Crocodile Bank Trust article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Madras Crocodile Bank Trust has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: July 10, 2024. (Reviewed version).

India: Tamil Nadu / Chennai / Protected areas Mid‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Tamil Nadu (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Chennai (assessed as High-importance).
	This article is supported by the Protected areas of India workgroup (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article was last assessed in April 2012.

Zoo

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Zoo, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to zoos, aquaria, and aviaries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ZooWikipedia:WikiProject ZooTemplate:WikiProject ZooZoo articles

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

GA Review

Passed. Recon rabbit 01:04, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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:Madras Crocodile Bank Trust/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Magentic Manifestations (talk · contribs) 10:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Reconrabbit (talk · contribs) 14:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Reconrabbit Thanks for taking it up. Will address the comments as they come! Magentic Manifestations (talk) 15:03, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I copy-edited some minor things for clarity and grammar last week, and since no one else has started a review I will do it now.

Prose

Lead provides a concise summary of the article's topics. Y
Following the initial copy-edit, there are no contradictory or confusing sentences I've found. Y

References

References are formatted correctly. Y
External links appropriate. Y
No copyright violations found, version is distinct from other language Wikipedias. Y

Sources check, numbers based on this revision:

[1] Y
[2] Y
[5] Y ~~Date given is inconsistent and the source for this information does not look great. 1975 looks to be the correct year which agrees with this site and [6].~~ Modified the source
[6] Y
[13] Y
[37] Y
[47] Y ~~Not a very strong source, primary research only cited once. There is a possible better reference from C. J. Stevenson here.~~ Added the source
[57] N ~~Self-published source on a blog. Better references are available.~~ Removed the source and tweaked the sentence
[77] Y

Images

All images are tagged with licenses. Y
Y ~~The infobox and caption states that the location is abbreviated "CrocBank" but this is never stated in the article or with a reference.~~ resolved
Y ~~There are a lot of images, and one of the two pictures of the reptile demonstration building could be removed.~~ removed one of the RDC images

Stability, neutrality, focus

There are no edit wars, content disputes in the article's recent history. No maintenance tags on the article either. Y
Article is written from a neutral point of view, and is not promotional of the topic. Y
Broadly covers relevant information to the subject. Y
Y The information on reptile stock may be too detailed and not generally useful to a reader. Is this kind of list standard in other wildlife conservation area articles? Referring to GAs of similar zoo articles (Very few are there!), there is a sea of blue i.e. laundry list of exhibits mentioned. There are no exact count of each animal species though. I am indifferent here. We can probably go with a list if the count seems to be too much data. Thanks!
I was viewing it on a very wide screen before. It looks better with smaller aspect ratio. It's doing no harm keeping it in and doesn't go against MOS:TABLE. It's out of the scope of this review. Recon rabbit 01:02, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

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.