This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
magazines 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.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
I've given the article a copyedit. Feel free to revert anything you disagree with.
Thanks; looks good. The only thing I changed was to put <references /> back in place of {{reflist}}, since you had no parameters on it. Without parameters it's no different to <references />, which is a lot more user friendly in visual editor.
Mike Christie (
talk -
contribs -
library)
14:43, 24 January 2015 (UTC)reply
when Weisinger left to edit Superman comics: I've changed this to "Superman comic books"---since you had "Superman" in italics, I assumed it meant this was the Superman-titled series. Is that so?
Actually I'm not sure what the best link is here. He left to be an editor of Superman comics, but as far as I can tell there were several by this time, so I don't think it's necessarily accurate to link to one specific comic book. I think you could argue for the comic link, since we're clearly talking about comics, or the straight
Superman link, treating Superman as an attributive noun for the comics he edited. I'm OK with leaving it as you have it if you think that's best.
Mike Christie (
talk -
contribs -
library)
14:43, 24 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Fantasy and occult fiction had often appeared: would it be inappropriate to link "Fantasy and occult fiction" to
weird fiction?
No images? Surely a cover shot would be appropriate.
Unfortunately they're still under copyright. You can see them all
here; Belarski's are Feb 39 and April 40; Bergey's are Aug/Oct/Dec 39, Feb/Jun/Aug/Oct/Dec 40, and Feb 41. If you think any of them would be justified as illustrating Weinberg's negative comment, then I'll add one.
Mike Christie (
talk -
contribs -
library)
14:43, 24 January 2015 (UTC)reply
The only source I can access is SF Encyclopedia. I can see no issues there, and the rest of teh article doesn't have any of the telltale signs of copyvio or close paraphrasing---just a couple of POV-ish issues mentioned above.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
magazines 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.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
I've given the article a copyedit. Feel free to revert anything you disagree with.
Thanks; looks good. The only thing I changed was to put <references /> back in place of {{reflist}}, since you had no parameters on it. Without parameters it's no different to <references />, which is a lot more user friendly in visual editor.
Mike Christie (
talk -
contribs -
library)
14:43, 24 January 2015 (UTC)reply
when Weisinger left to edit Superman comics: I've changed this to "Superman comic books"---since you had "Superman" in italics, I assumed it meant this was the Superman-titled series. Is that so?
Actually I'm not sure what the best link is here. He left to be an editor of Superman comics, but as far as I can tell there were several by this time, so I don't think it's necessarily accurate to link to one specific comic book. I think you could argue for the comic link, since we're clearly talking about comics, or the straight
Superman link, treating Superman as an attributive noun for the comics he edited. I'm OK with leaving it as you have it if you think that's best.
Mike Christie (
talk -
contribs -
library)
14:43, 24 January 2015 (UTC)reply
Fantasy and occult fiction had often appeared: would it be inappropriate to link "Fantasy and occult fiction" to
weird fiction?
No images? Surely a cover shot would be appropriate.
Unfortunately they're still under copyright. You can see them all
here; Belarski's are Feb 39 and April 40; Bergey's are Aug/Oct/Dec 39, Feb/Jun/Aug/Oct/Dec 40, and Feb 41. If you think any of them would be justified as illustrating Weinberg's negative comment, then I'll add one.
Mike Christie (
talk -
contribs -
library)
14:43, 24 January 2015 (UTC)reply
The only source I can access is SF Encyclopedia. I can see no issues there, and the rest of teh article doesn't have any of the telltale signs of copyvio or close paraphrasing---just a couple of POV-ish issues mentioned above.