Talk:Spider-Woman (Gwen Stacy)

Spider-Woman (Gwen Stacy) has been listed as one of the Language and literature 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 31, 2017. (Reviewed version).

Comics: Marvel / Spider-Man Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Related work groups:
/
	This article is supported by Marvel Comics work group.
	This article is supported by Spider-Man work group.

Fictional characters

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters 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.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Cartoon network freak, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 3 July 2017.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors

Women

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women

2010s Low‑importance

	2010s portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject 2010s, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2010s 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.2010sWikipedia:WikiProject 2010sTemplate:WikiProject 2010s2010s
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Wasserman, Ben (May 31, 2023). "Marvel's Spider-Verse Has Transformed Spider-Gwen into a Modern Icon". CBR. Retrieved June 15, 2023.

Sense and sensibility

Does it make sense to have a Spider-Woman (Gwen Stacy) article and seperate Spider-Gwen? They should be merged Rachelskit (talk) 14:14, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Spider-Gwen could be merged here with its info still intact but not vice versa. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 14:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is an example of what it will look like. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 20:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Spider-woman (Gwen Stacy) is her name, but Spider-Gwen is the publication, which can merged. I think it looks good the way you did it! But, we should have a direct here from the Spider-Gwen page. Rachelskit (talk) 21:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I will boldly try to redirect it but if I get reverted I ain't going to edit war by any means. I am pretty much neutral about it. The positive thing about it is it could improve this article. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 16:26, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hah, nobody wants an edit war!I know editors don't like it when they create a page and it gets deleted, but it makes sense to merge these pages. Rachelskit (talk) 16:59, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Spoke too soon! It got reverted. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 02:51, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think there should keep the page separate with the character page to be enhanced with her fictional character biography. As for the Spider-Gwen page, I was thinking we should add a character section to it so that it can list it's characters from Earth-65 including the full details of the Earth-65 characters that don't have Earth-616 counterparts. Any objections? --Rtkat3 (talk) 03:43, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't there be a lot of duplication? Also confusion when people are searching for Spider-Gwen and they find two separate pages?

The comic history would be listed on the comic series page. It was added to the Marvel Multiverse template to represent Earth-65. I am suggesting that we add a character section to talk about the brief info on the Earth-65 characters that have Earth-616 counterparts and a detailed information of those Earth-65 characters that don't have Earth-616 counterparts like the Bodega Bandit, a variation of the Yancy Street Gang, and the organization S.I.L.K. which is run by the Earth-65 version of Cindy Moon. --Rtkat3 (talk) 15:06, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Collected Editions

Does anybody know the collected editions involved?Rachelskit (talk) 17:01, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Spider-Woman (Gwen Stacy)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Adamstom.97 (talk · contribs) 23:37, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Think I'll give reviewing this a go. I've never reviewed a comics-based article, but I have been involved with some and I have reviewed a few TV and film articles, so this should not be too difficult. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:37, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First try

Here are some issues that I have found in the first couple of sections that need to be addressed:

The infobox image caption could probably just say "Cover art for Spider-Gwen #0 (November 2015) by Robbi Rodriguez"

Done.Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 04:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are all of those alternate Spider-Mans really notable enough to be listed as partners in the infobox? If they are all Web Warriors or something, then the team affiliations bit probably covers that, and the partnerships could be cut down to two or three big ones.

Done. I took out the Web Warriors. That narrows it down to four if that's ok? Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 04:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The lead should include a line about the reception to the character, probably at the start of the third paragraph.
The design sheet image could probably go somewhere else, as it is very close to the infobox image and isn't really tied to the publication section. I would suggest the reception section but there is already the cosplay image there, so maybe in the characteristics section?
Ok. Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 04:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"was concerned restoring" doesn't make sense.

I copyedited. Better? Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 04:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason Rodriguez is wikilinked to in the publication section but no where else (should be consistent with the red link, either use it properly if you think an article should be created for him, or don't use it at all).

Ok. I redlinked all the times he was mentioned. Unless you prefer not to link at all. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 04:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"and which" should be something like "saying that she".

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 04:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Slott, conversely, had" should be "Slott previously had", and "Regardless, Slott preferred and approved Rodriquez' design" should be "Slott ultimately approved of Rodriquez' design"

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 04:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"fridged" could be linked to Women in Refrigerators, and the note on that could be removed from this article.

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 04:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"superhero comics. So Latour saw Gwen" should be "superhero comics, and saw Gwen".

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 04:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There should be a comma before "saying, '".

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 04:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Take care of those, and then the character summary needs a copy-edit. There are sentences in there that definitely don't make sense, and there is also quite a bit of info that seems to be there just to explain the differences between Earth-65 and the normal universe, which isn't what this page is for (the separate Spider-Gwen article can cover those differences). I'll carry on with the rest of the article once this stuff is covered. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:54, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think that all looks pretty good. Just give that summary a copy-edit and I'll have a look over the rest of the article. - adamstom97 (talk) 05:19, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I copyedited it. Hopefully it's improved somewhat. I would feel better if it's reviewed again. It's not an easy plot summary. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 20:15, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a little difficult for me as I can't really get majorly involved with the copy-editing since I am the reviewer. Perhaps you could find someone else to do a copy-edit with fresh eyes, even if it is someone from the Guild. I am happy to wait until that is done. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:41, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well I wasn't asking you to copy edit. I was asking for a specific review on what needed copy edited as I have sort of already did my part. I will ask for others to help too. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 22:31, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well I had an Guild come over copyedited the article. I disagreed with a fair use image on there so I made a substitute. If you find it unnecessary then I can remove it too. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:20, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, I'll have another look through the article soon and get back to a more specific review. - adamstom97 (talk) 02:30, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Second

I am starting from the beginning of the article again. Unfortunately, it looks like your copy-editor hasn't done a great job of making sure the article is well written and sensical, which is a big part of GA. I'll do my best to help fix that now, but there is still a lot of this article written in poor English.

All throughout the article the character is referred to as both "it" and "she". Should just be "she".

I think I got them all. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the fragment "with the latter designing it in a mysterious way" should be removed, and a new paragraph should be begun after "commenced in 2015." A brief summary of the characteristics section should then be added to the second paragraph after the various enemies info.

Done. Proofreading may be required for the addition. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Marvel dubs as Earth-65" should just be "Marvel dubs Earth-65".

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 03:11, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We shouldn't link to List of Spider-Man enemies as that is about the main Spider-Man's enemies and does not discuss this version of the character at all.

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 03:11, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The last paragraph needs a c/e ("Super-Woman", "reviewes", "feminism perspective"

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 03:11, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Before the line beginning "In October 2014, Nick Lowe", you need to add a sourced line stating that the character is commonly referred to as "Spider-Gwen". This is then used as a name throughout the article so it is important to establish it first.
The caption for the image in the summary section is a bit confusing. The terms above and below in image captions generally refer to two images, and I thought something had gone wrong with the wiki-markup that wasn't showing the second image. If it is supposed to be a single image, then the caption should read "depicting the Mary Janes (top) with Earth-616's Jessica Drew (bottom)."

Done.Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"becoming Earth-65's universe's original version of" should be "becoming the Earth-65 universe's version of".

Parker wasn't the only Lizard. They introduced Dr. Curt Connors among other men as Lizard too later on. That's why I added "original". Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 03:35, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"At a gig of the Mary Janes playing" doesn't make sense.

I changed it. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There should not be an extra period after S.H.I.E.L.D.

Fixed. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Having six inline references together is quite a bit. I suggest Help:Citation merging. There should also be a space after those citations.

There isn't as many now and they are spaced out. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"She revealed Silk and Gwen Stacy that she planed to steal technology to take over the world." should be "She revealed to Silk and Gwen Stacy that she stole the technology to take over the world."

I fixed that while being specific on who "she" is. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"into escaping" should be "in escaping".

Done Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the caption for the image in the characteristics section, can we just say shoes instead of "Chucks"? I had to google what they were.

Sure.

Done. 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Any instance of "Earth 65" should be consistently "Earth-65".

Agreed.

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"experimentation of himself" should be "experimentation on himself".

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"similar powers of Spider-Man" should be "similar powers to Spider-Man".

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"given by her" should be "given to her".

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"swing building to building" should be "swing from building to building".

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"has a possession of a wristwatch that helps her travel to other multiverses due to the "Spider-Verse" events." should be "has possession of a wristwatch that allows her to travel through the multiverse, following the events of "Spider-Verse."

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"The daughter of police captain, George Stacy, Spider-Woman is depicted having detecting skills, analytical thinking and drummer skills. However, she is untrained in fighting and only picked up from kung fu films." should be "As the daughter of a police captain, Spider-Woman has detective skills and analytical thinking. She is not trained in fighting, but has picked up on elements from kung fu films."

Done.Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Reed Richards helping her regain power through" should be "Reed Richards helping her regain her power through".

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"design is in part of" should be "design is part of".

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"along other female-themed" should be "and other female-themed".

Done.Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't refer to real life people by just their first name. It is bad enough that this article does so with fictional people. Either their full name, or their surname.

My bad. Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"her own brand of humor to stand apart from her own" doesn't make sense.

"from her own" is gone from the article. Everything else is a quote from what he said. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)`[reply]

"feminism perspective" again, should be "feminist perspective".

Done. 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

"best Spider-Men by" should be "best Spider-Man by".

I quoted "Spider-Men" because that's what the source said. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"alternate versions of Spider-Man" should be "alternate version of Spider-Man"

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"opining that she was" should be "opining that her stories were".

Makes sense.

Done. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what "chils" is.

That's a typo on the copyeditors part. Fixed. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this article have an external link to Reddit?

I am not sure why. So I removed it. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On the images, I think the three ones in the body of the article are all good. They should either be all right aligned, or alternate sides of the article, but not aligned as they are now.

Ok. They are all right then. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if there are any problems with these points. - adamstom97 (talk) 23:06, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamstom.97:They only problems I have with is that the Peter isn't the only Lizard and that "Spider-Men" seems more accurate according to the source. Double checking may be needed. I also hope you make sense out of the her brand of humor part because I understand it. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 00:13, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I figured that was the case with "original", but I still think it should be removed. This article isn't for explaining that info, and in fact it does not, so the way it is presented is confusing. Removing "original" clears up the confusion by removing mention of something that isn't explained, and it makes the sentence read better. As for "Spider-Men", the problem is that it doesn't make sense in that sentence. It should either be "was listed as the seventh best Spider-Man by" or "was named number seven in a list of the best Spider-Men by", something like that. - adamstom97 (talk) 21:58, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Adamstom.97:Ok. I believe I did everything. You are welcome to check. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 23:33, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that looks good. I'll give the article another check soon, but I think I am reasonably happy with how the article is written now and will be able to move onto the next section of the review. - adamstom97 (talk) 01:27, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Third

@Jhenderson777: Sorry for the long wait, I've been busy of late and this slipped my mind. Firstly, a few things that I have found just going over the article again:

In the context of the lead for this article, the mention of Earth-616 seems unnecessarily confusing. Taking that out still reads fine, and for the purposes of the short summary should be okay.
Still a couple uses of "it" when referring to the character throughout the article.
I've just noticed a few instances where there are multiple references together. These should not have spaces between them.
The first paragraph of the publication section ends with two sentences beginning with "The character". The second could probably be changed to "She" or something.
"when he realized that he was familiar with" should be "when he realized that he was not familiar with".
"Earth-65's universe's version" should be "Earth-65's version"

Other than those, the article is looking pretty good. Referencing is fine, cosplay image is fine. The other three images could do with better rationales for being used—you need to convince the strictest editors that you have a good reason to include those. Sort those things out and we'll probably be good to go. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:26, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I took care of the bulleted points. I'll leave the image issues to User:Jhenderson777. Argento Surfer (talk) 18:25, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hey. Clearly I was inactive for a bit. I understand you were busy in other articles. I will see what I can do with the images. I might remove the band one too. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 01:36, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Argento Surfer: I might need help on figuring out the "better" rationale. I thank you for too for the copyediting. I would've done it sooner or later.Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 01:48, 29 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded some of the rationales. I think the band one should go - it's not a very good image, especially for character identification. It would help if the caption named all of them, but not much. I think the character sheet should be taken out also. It's a nice clear picture of the costume, but all the elements highlighted by the caption are visible in the infobox image. Argento Surfer (talk) 13:57, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok then. I removed those two images. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 20:25, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Very well then, that covers all my issues so I'll pass

the article. Well done guys, and sorry again for taking so long to get back to you. - adamstom97 (talk) 22:22, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I get sidetracked with other articles (or real life) too. Also thanks for the review. I am happy it passed. :) Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 22:54, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Faint praise

Is it really notable to be listed 7th out of a list of 10?

Gwen Stacy's Spider-Woman was named number seven in a list of the best Spider-Men by Newsarama.[45]

I thought maybe it could be improved by adding context and mentioning that the list was published in March 2016 and the character was relatively new but the very next sentence has a list from April 2016 calling her the 2nd greatest alt-Spidey. I suggest dropping this faint praise entirely as it is counter-productive. -- 109.77.209.152 (talk) 02:50, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed notable that she is listed there. We might not need to add the rank because the list has updated itself as proven by the archive. But I still feel that the source and a mention belongs. Jhenderson⁷⁷⁷ 03:58, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reviews

Aren´t the reviews a bit one-sided? The character might have gotten mostly positive reviews but it´shard to believe there was no negative criticism anywhere.77.179.172.214 (talk) 11:33, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image deletion nomination(s)

One or more images currently used in this article have been nominated for deletion as violations of the non-free content criteria (NFCC).

You can read more about what this means and why these files are being nominated for deletion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Comics#Image deletion nominations for NFCC 8 and 3a.

You can participate at the deletion discussion(s) at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2020 May 4. If you are not familiar with NFCC-related deletion discussions, I recommend reading the post linked above first.

Sincerely, The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 06:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated article

This article is duplicated here: https://wiki.x.io/wiki/spider-gwen 2806:2F0:51E0:5748:11F0:250E:41B5:80B4 (talk) 13:13, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@2806:2F0:51E0:5748:11F0:250E:41B5:80B4 http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Spider-Gwen 2806:2F0:51E0:5748:11F0:250E:41B5:80B4 (talk) 13:16, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

She appeared some were else before into the spider verse

Gwen but and alternate version appears first to my knowledge in “The Amazing Spider-man” series 68.100.230.171 (talk) 13:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling of her name

Last I checked, Spider-Gwen/Ghost-Spider's name was more-or-less consistently spelled "Gwendolyn Stacy" without an e, both by her creators and all but one subsequent writer.2001:569:F875:3D00:210E:D96F:44F7:8C1E (talk) 2001:569:F875:3D00:210E:D96F:44F7:8C1E (talk) 03:04, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that both Latour and Seeley both spell her full name as "Gwendolyn" rather than "Gwendolyne." While there is a 2019 tumblr reply from McGuire that suggests that dropping the "e" is a typo, in 2020 she chalked it up to different conventions and editors: https://seananmcguire.tumblr.com/post/612951587233710080/ive-noticed-that-in-ghost-spider-gwen. In that context, I'm inclined to change the article to use the former as it's ostensibly more common at present. YanA (talk) 02:51, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's an uncited comment in the info box that Latour stated that her name does include the "e", but I have been unable to verify the veracity of the claim. YanA (talk) 03:07, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]