Talk:Willy Vandersteen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Willy Vandersteen has been listed as one of the Arts good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
WikiProject Comics
comics
Portal
This article is in the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! Help with current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project talk page.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. Please explain the rating here.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] Good article

The article is relatively good but there are some parts that could use some work.

  • The into should be expanded it is currently one sentence.
  • I think the biography would be better if broken into time periods with names other than just dates (eg ."his work in Belgium")
  • More references should be cited.

This is my first good article review ever though so feel free to disregard my opinions. -Icewedge 03:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, they are useful. I'll have to think about your second point, but I have expanded the intro now (with some additional sources!). I hope this helps a bit. Fram 08:33, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
  5. It is stable.
  6. It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
    a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA): c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
  7. Overall:
    a Pass/Fail: GreenJoe 20:48, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm putting the article on hold. It really needs to have a longer lead per WP:MOS, and if possible, a few more images. I agree with Fram Icewedge, more references should be cited. GreenJoe 20:48, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

With the expanded intro I think it is a good enough article. There are a few Manual of Style issues but there not particularly bad. As I have said before I am not an expert GA reviewer but it has my pass vote. If you want this to reach featured article standard though the main biography portion is going to need some reformatting. Keep up the good work Fram :) -Icewedge 23:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the kind review. I have expanded the intro, adding some significant facts, I just hope it is not too promotional now (even though it is sourced). As for more images, I would prefer this as well, but I have no method to get free (public domain) pics of Vandersteen or his work, and adding more fair use pics will be a violation of the fair use standards. Fram 11:43, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
How to get free images in your spare time. GreenJoe 15:24, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
I've added one more image from commons. As for contacting the person: well, he is rather dead :-) I can always check with his publisher of course, to see if they want to relese an image of him and/or his creations with a suitable license. Thanks for the info! Fram 08:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)