Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Gustaf Einar Du Rietz/1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · WatchWatch article reassessment pageMost recent review
Result pending

Per this discussion, this article was found to have been, at least in part, LLM-generated. Wikipedia cannot in good conscience reward LLM-generated articles with GA status. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:13, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Retain Since no actual issues with the article were noted in the above nomination, seems like a procedural retain close is appropriate. SilverserenC 02:31, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Delist
Let's take this sentence:
The dissertation was translated into German and printed in Vienna for economic reasons, reflecting the scientific language preference in the Nordic countries at the time.
and let's compare it, not to the cited source, but a paper cited elsewhere in the article:
The dissertation was translated into German, the then common scientific language in the Nordic countries, and printed in Vienna (for economic reasons).
Going on, we get:
The defence, held in Uppsala in spring 1921, was reportedly dramatic The thesis focused on the methodological foundations of modern plant sociology, covering topics such as life forms, stratification, and the associations based on dominant species' life forms, as well as the concept of constancy and field boundary lines. Although logical and impressive for its era, the dissertation was quite schematic and faced criticism, particularly regarding the so-called Konstanzgesetze ('laws of constancy', i.e., principles regarding the regular occurrence of certain plant species within specific types of vegetation communities or habitats).
which, when compared with the same source
A reportedly dramatic public defence took place in Uppsala in the spring of 1921. .... It does not hurt to give an account of the content: as mentioned, an impressive history, chapters on life forms, stratification, associations based on the dominants of the strata according to their life form, so-called constancy, boundary lines in the field and so on. This plant sociology was logical and impressive for its time, but rather schematic. It was criticized especially regarding the so-called Konstanzgesetze.
Again in that section, compare:
The seventeen-year-old who registered at Uppsala University developed a varied interest in outdoor botany, especially in lichens and coastal areas, passions that he maintained throughout his life. He especially liked to explore the lifeforms present in the outer archipelago of the Baltic Sea and on Jungfrun, a nature reserve on the island of Gotland
with the google-translated source (again, not the one cited)
The seventeen-year-old who enrolled at Uppsala University had diverse outdoor botanical interests, primarily lichens and beaches, inclinations that followed him throughout his life. He particularly botanized in the outer archipelago of the Baltic Sea and on the island of Jungfrun in Kalmar Sound
This is what I found by glancing in their first section; this isn't the worst close paraphrasing I've seen, but it's incredibly obvious and it's obvious that this wasn't checked well enough by the author. Combined with the way that the text has been cited to a different source... I'm not particularly fussed about rewarding AI generated content, but any article with close paraphrasing issues this obvious is not a good article. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🧸 02:47, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That does seem to be an actual writing issue, specifically WP:TRANSVIO, since the source in question is in Swedish. Makes me wonder, since that source is the most extensively used throughout the article at 14 times, and there is only source for that main paragraph you're quoting from, if that's meant to be there instead of the Biographical Dictionary. Though the latter source does discuss the thesis directly (I went ahead and OCRed the text to check that, since there's no easy way to translate it otherwise). Preceding unsigned comment added by Silver seren (talkcontribs) 03:32, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't surprise me if that was the case; it also wouldn't surprise me if sources were just tacked on semi-randomly by either the machine or the author. GreenLipstickLesbian💌🧸 18:59, 11 May 2026 (UTC)[reply]