Talk:Barry Windsor-Smith/GA1

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

Reviewer: Kj cheetham (talk · contribs) 16:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

Starting review. -Kj cheetham (talk) 16:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

I've now done my first pass:

Lead – ok, but refs [4] and [5] should be merged (The Guardian article).

Early life – bit short, but fine. His first published work was before he was 20, so didn’t expect a lot of details before that. Should be tweaked so it’s less like the reference as shown in https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&oldid=1169030818&action=compare&url=http%3A%2F%2Fbarrywindsor-smith.com%2Fstudio%2Fbwsbio1.html

Career – mostly ok. Needs better referencing for the first half of the paragraph starting “At this point he changed his professional surname to Windsor-Smith” I think.

1980s – ok

1990s – ok, though sentence starting “Valiant had obtained the licenses” might be a bit off-topic, perhaps make it shorter? “The third largest comics publisher in the U.S. behind the long-time industry leaders Marvel and DC.” should be reworded as looks like copying from the source.

2000s – I assume this covers 2010s as well? Much shorter than last two sub-sections, but that’s ok if less things happened. Any references what was he doing the 16 gaps without publishing? Sentence starting “He was working on a Superman story in 1999” should be in the previous section.

2020s – ok

Personal life – ok. I assume no children or such to mention?

Awards – ok. I’m assuming the ones which are only nominated are sufficiently notable awards to still include in this list, especially as most awards already have their own Wikipedia articles too. Is there a better ref for "1993 – UK Comic Art Awards Best New Feature" than LinkedIn? The 2022 refs should be merged. I'm not sure if http://www.hahnlibrary.net/ is a reliable source or not, but it would be better to use another source if possible.

Bibliography – should have a reference. Books all have ISBNs at least, which is good.

References – seem ok.

External links – fine.

Image is fine, relevant with caption and appropriate license. Would be nice to include further images for an article this length, but not required for Good status.

No major copyvio issues overall. Things flagged on earwig seem to be mostly quotes

General discussion
, Overall, looks to be in good condition, but I want to do some spot checks on references and another read through before I mark it as a pass. I’ve done a couple of very minor formatting tweaks myself already. See more detailed comments above. -Kj cheetham (talk) 20:24, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I think I can have all the issues resolved within a day. And I think the Comic Book Awards Almanac can be considered reliable. Many of the best sources within comics topics are written by fans, such as TwoMorrows Publishing magazines and Wizard (magazine). The almanac has also been cited by several comic book sources. --FlairTale (talk) 05:03, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
 * All of the comments should be ✅. Windsor-Smith seems to have spent the 2010s and later part of the 2000s working on Monsters or doing non-published work. I thoroughly looked for a source of him having children and could not find any. The nominated awards have strong notability, and I removed the UK Comic Art Awards because there do no appear to be any strong sources for it. Two more images were included, which showcase how Windsor-Smith's artstyle changed over time. --FlairTale (talk) 11:11, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
 * , sorry for my delay in responding, I had to delay with some things off-wiki! Your changes look good though. The two new images are both marked as "fair use", so that's fine. The first couple of sentances of the Early Life section are a bit close to http://barrywindsor-smith.com/studio/bwsbio1.html still as per earwig, but that's minor and wouldn't stop it being a GA to me.
 * I'm still not 100% sure if Comic Book Awards Almanac is WP:RELIABLE looking at http://www.hahnlibrary.net/comics/awards/about.php. But based on WP:RSSELF it seems like it might be okay, so I'll take it on good faith that it is.
 * I've nothing further to add, so I'm happy to mark this as passed! Thank you for all your contributions. -Kj cheetham (talk) 19:42, 15 August 2023 (UTC)