Talk:Rufus Segar/GA1

Summarize Timeline Top Qs Fact Check

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: John Desmond (talk · contribs) 19:42, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Krisgabwoosh (talk · contribs) 19:17, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

I'll take this review. Seems like an interesting article that needs a little work to get to GA. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 19:17, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

I'm transcluding the nominator's initial review comments, which were made as direct replies on their Talk Page:

Thank you very much for this update. I've printed off the review page and I've briefly read the comments. I greatly appreciate your effort in undertaking the review and I very much hope to address the comments as soon as possible. John Desmond (talk) 19:11, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

I have now addressed your comments to the best of my ability, some of which I've addressed implicitly with additional edits. There are three issues to which I should like to draw your attention. The first issue is that I've inserted into the lead section 'critical acclaim', which I hope that you don't consider is an exaggeration. The second issue relates to Poyner's 2012 book 'Autonomy etc.', which I feel extremely lucky to own. I can't remember what possessed me to cite it in the way that I did. Regardless, it relates to the informal structure of his book. Poyner contributed an Introduction to it, Poyner (2012b), and an essay at the end of it (one of four essays), 'A conversation with Rufus Segar' (2012a), both of which I've cited as contributions. For the record, Poyner (2012) doesn't have a chapter - I'd call it an art book. The third issue relates to the books that Segar illustrated in his retirement. To the best of my knowledge they are inaccessible. Consequently I've deleted them, which I don't consider detracts from his work. I should be very happy to receive your comments to which I hope I will be able to respond promptly. John Desmond (talk) 13:53, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

On the books he illustrated you say “To the best of my knowledge they are inaccessible.” I don’t follow the logic for why a book being out of print or hard to get hold of means they shouldn’t be listed under his artistic contributions? — LittleDwangs (talk) 21:25, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

I also note Segar’s son’s Guardian obituary states Segar’s “greatest love was reserved for the books he illustrated, including The Cockney Alphabet (1965), Remember Hythe (1992), and On the Tip of My Tongue (1995), all enriched with his visual wit.” — LittleDwangs (talk) 21:59, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

I agree, the "Illustrated books" section didn't need to be removed. I just didn't think that citing them worked as a source in-text. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 22:22, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

Initial comments

• The major issue I find with this article is its overuse of quotations. Per MOS:QUOTE: "excessive use of [quotes] is incompatible with an encyclopedic writing style and may be copyright infringement, so most of the content should be in the editor's own words". The readable prose for this article is roughly 2,000 words. Of this, about 1,090 words by my count come from quoted material. That's just over half of the article. The bulk of this comes from the section covering his work on Anarchy magazine, which is a problem because this is supposedly what he's most noted for.
• I performed some minor copyedits of my own for grammar and punctuation.
• Comments and spotchecks are based on the revision of the page from 20:06, 11 August 2026 (1368909421).

Lead section

• The lead section should establish the article's notability within the first few sentences. I recommend mentioning his work on Anarchy, perhaps something like: "known for his covers of Anarchy magazine".
• Links in the lead section should be linked again on first mention in the article body. I took the liberty of populating the article with relevant links.

Early life

• I would restate the full name on first mention in the article body.
  • Done.
• Mention that his birthplace is in England.
  • Done.
• The latter half of this first paragraph is a bit repetitive – "In [year] they moved to [place]"; can it be rewritten to improve flow?
  • Still a bit repetitive but not an issue worth dwelling on.
• "the age of ten or twelve years old": Use numerals for ages, unless that isn't ordinary style in British English.
  • Done.
• 'Illustration' should be written in lowercase.
  • Done.
• Remove the quote block and integrate it into the text.
  • I perhaps did not make clear what I meant here. I did not meant to make the quote part of the paragraph. I meant that the quote itself is too long and the essential parts should be broken up and/or rephrased in your own words.
• The lead section states that "He and his wife were life-long anarchists" but the article body only states that "He was to become a life-long anarchist". Does the source support that his wife was too? If so, mention that.
  • Now cited with a quote. Rather than a note with a quote with a citation, I added a citation with the quote.
• Do the sources mention when Segar and Bullard were married? The lead section states that they were still dating in 1953.
  • Information with citations was added.

Work in the private sector

• Is Hunt Partners the name of the factory? If so, it doesn't need to be italicized.
  • Done.
• "In 1965, Segar had published his first book": Does the source mention anything more about this?

Designing the covers for Anarchy magazine

• I mentioned earlier that this section has far too much quoted material. Let's go over each individually.
• The first quote block regards the magazine's page format. I struggle to find the relevance, unless the idea is that people liked Segar's illustrations and put them on their bookshelves because the format made them fit.
  • The quote has been shortened but I still don't see how the information in it is relevant to Segar.
• The second quote block talks about the magazine's production process. It is too long and goes into unnecessary detail. The only relevant aspects are the fact that Segar disliked the way it was made.
  • This has now been split into two shorter quotes. The first just repeats information summarized in the sentence before it. The second quote is more interesting but still quite long.
• The third and fourth quote blocks are the most relevant to Segar himself. I believe you could write these in your own words, with a few relevant quotations splashed in.
  • The information in these quotes can just as easily be written in your own words.
• The fifth quote box in the "tributes" section needs to be significantly cut down to size.

Retirement

• "In 1992, he had published his own book": Again, is there more information on this book?
• Hythe Civic Society does not need to be italicized.
  • Done.
• "Working with [Segar] over the years we and our families became friends": This sentence can be cut as it is already mentioned that they became friends.
  • Done.
• MacSegar Press does not need to be italicized. Also, why the "[sic]" if it is not a quotation?
  • Done.
• "including The Cockney Alphabet (1965), Remember Hythe (1992), and On the Tip of My Tongue (1995)": Remove these from the quote.
  • Done.

Source spotcheck

• [1] Dunn & MacPhee 2010, p. 119: This citation should use Template:Cite journal with "Designing Anarchy: The Graphic Covers of Rufus Segar" as the title and Signal as the journal.
  • [1a]: States birthplace and verifies quote. In addition, the source states that he was born in 1932 but does not give the precise date. This isn't an issue here, because the prose does not mention his birth date. However, the lead states that he was born 28 August 1932, which should be cited somewhere in the body text.
    • Birthdate is now included in the text. Can you confirm that Poyner 2012a has his full date of birth?
  • [1b]: Supports that he enrolled in 1949.
• [2][4][5][8][15][27] Poyner 2012: I don't have access to this book, so assume good faith on citations. I will note that Poyner 2012a, 2012b, and 2012c, are all different chapters in the same book. Since the chapter author is the same as the book author, there is no need to separate them and they should be condensed into a single "Poyner 2012" citation.
• [3] Segar 2015:
  • [3b]: The source doesn't support that St Asaph Grammar School is now Ysgol Glan Clwyd. The relevant article states that the school opened in 1956 in a different town, long after Segar attended school in St Asaph. I'd say change this to "attended grammar school in St Asaph".
    • The reference to the school was removed.
  • [3c]: The source doesn't support that Segar "worked in a box factory, Hunt Partners in Clapton". It only states that he was a "box designer".
    • Done. I changed "in a box designer" to "as a box designer". Removed the redundant "as a designer" at the end of the sentence.
  • [3d][3e]: The two claims are supported in the obituary. Move the citation to the end of the third sentence rather than repeating it thrice in a row.
• [6] See Horatio Myer: I understand what you're going for, but this makes it seem like you're using the article on Horatio Myer as a citation. I'm sure you know that you can't use Wikipedia as a source on Wikipedia. The claim preceding the citation does appear in Dunn & MacPhee 2010, p. 120, which is the next citation over; this is probably the intended source. If you want to keep the reference to Myer, you can link Horatio Myer & Co Ltd and make it a redirect to the article.
  • Done.
• [7] Dunn & MacPhee 2010, p. 120:
  • [7a][7b]: Both claims are supported by the source. Move the citation to the end of the second sentence rather than repeating it twice in a row.
• [9][14][16][19][25][40]: These are explanatory notes rather than citations. Use Template:Efn and add Template:Notelist. Rather than linking to the source within the note, add a citation at the end of each note.
• [10][33] Segar 1965 & 1992: These seek to affirm the claim by simply linking to the books. Better to find a citation that directly states that he published these works or at least contains a list of published books. It's probably fine as is for [33] but [10] specifically does not support the claim that the book is his first work. Alternatively, you can remove these from the prose and add a "published works" section formatted the same way at the "illustrated books" one.
• [11][12] Our History: This needs to be a full citation. Remove [11] and keep [12] rather than repeating duplicate citations twice in a row. The source supports the claims.
• [13]: This is a primary source again. Find a source that makes mention of the claims made.
• [17]: Rather than the note, you can link to the first page of the journal which states that he is the cover artist. However, that does not support the claim that he started with this issue. I'd prefer a different citation that directly states the claim rather than having to interpret it from a primary source.
• [36][37][38]: I'm hesitant to accept these. I'd prefer a source that directly states that he illustrated them. I would, at the very least, like citations to the specific page in each book citing him as the illustrator. You do this with [43] by specifically citing the page where he is acknowledged.