Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Famous Fantastic Mysteries/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by GrahamColm 10:02, 25 April 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Famous Fantastic Mysteries edit

Famous Fantastic Mysteries (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:07, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of a series of articles on science fiction and fantasy magazines that I've been working on. Famous Fantastic Mysteries was one of the most popular science fiction pulps. It was created as a vehicle for reprinting old classics, but published a little new material too. It was generally regarded as one of the most attractively illustrated pulps: Virgil Finlay, one of the most popular pulp artists, was a frequent contributor. There's not as much written about this magazine as about some of the others I've worked on, perhaps because it's a reprint, but I've assembled everything I've been able to find. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:07, 19 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

  • Compare Day title between footnotes and bib entry
  • Publisher and location for Knight? Also, dates don't seem consistent here. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Day is fixed, assuming that it was just the hyphen that was at issue; the cover has no hyphen but the title page does. For the Knight, see this discussion, which is why it looks the way it does; is there a better way to do this? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What about making the parenthetical "(reprint of 1967 2nd ed.)", which would at least avoid the doubled ed.? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:00, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Support All issues were adequately addressed.--Dwaipayan (talk) 02:56, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Some story names are within quotes, while others in italic. Example, "...including stories such as Murray Leinster's The War of the Purple Gas and Arthur Leo Zagat's "Tomorrow"...". Any particular reason for this?
    The italics is for novels and quotes for short stories; "Tomorrow" is short, but I'm not sure about the Leinster -- I will have to check my references when I get back home on Sunday. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, got it.
  • "... though they did not own any magazines that printed nothing but science fiction.". Okay, but perhaps can be simplified to avoid the double negative sentence construction.
    I struggled with this sentence. How about "though they owned no specialist science fiction magazines", or "owned no magazines that specalized in science fiction"? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "By the end of the 1930s the field was booming..." Which field? Not clear from the preceding sentence.
    Rephrased. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fine.
  • "The two magazines were placed an alternating bimonthly schedules..." Missing a word. Perhaps "on"?
    It was a typo; I changed "an" to "on"; I think that fixes it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Great.
  • "The first issue from Popular appeared in March 1943, and only two more issues appeared that year. It returned to a bimonthly schedule in 1946 which it maintained with only slight deviations until the end of its run" What happened in the interim? 1944, 1945? Was it bimonthly or irregular?
    Clarified. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done.
  • "The first issue included Ray Cummings' "The Girl in the Golden Atom" and A. Merritt's "The Moon Pool", both popular stories that would have attracted aficionados to the magazine.". An opinion. Needs attribution, or, at least, reference.
    Will do when I get back to my refs. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I reworded this to "both popular stories by major names" as when I looked back at the source I felt my wording was a little too close to the original. I also moved the duplicated reference (a couple of sentences further down) so it directly follows this sentence; Ashley makes this point clearly, and to be honest I don't think it's controversial. It would be easy to find multiple sources stating these were significant sf/fantasy authors of the period. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:10, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Merritt's sequel, "The Conquest of the Moon Pool", began serialization in the next issue..." Is "from the next issue" better?
    I'm not sure about this. "Serialization" is a noun, so I think it's OK for the beginning of the serialization to be "in" an issue. I think I prefer "in"; do you feel strongly about this? Perhaps this is an AmEng/BrEng distinction? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, I do not feel strongly about this, and myself in doubt about my comment. "In" is fine for now.
  • "The first five covers were simply tables of contents, but with the sixth issue pictorial covers began". Was this sixth issue the March 1940 issue? That can be mentioned in this sentence.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    It's mentioned in the very next sentence -- is that enough? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, The current version reads, "The first five covers were simply tables of contents, but with the sixth issue pictorial covers began. The first artist, for the March 1940 issue, was Finlay." For me, on a quick reading, it was not completely clear that the first issue with pictorial cover was indeed March 1940 issue. However, on a more concentrated reading, the connection is more clear. Still, something like, "The first five covers were simply tables of contents, but with the sixth issue (dated March 1940) pictorial covers began. The first artist for the cover was Finlay" or something better (without the brackets) can be written. --Dwaipayan (talk) 20:35, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      OK, I think something like that would be better. I'm going to wait to fix this till I have access to my references again; I want to move the information around a little bit and want to be sure I'm using the right source for the each bit of information. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:32, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      Now done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:14, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

  • This is my first FA review, so take it with a grain of salt.
  • Three semicolons in the lead seems a little much, consider replacing one or to of them with a full stop.
    Agreed; done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The magazine finally folded "Folded" seems a bit informal to me.
    Changed to "ceased publication". Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • science fiction (sf) stories were frequently seen in popular magazines In order to avoid the passive voice here, consider something like popular magazines often featured science fiction (sf) stories. Also considering placing a comma after "20th century," I think this would make the sentence flow better.
    I added the comma, but I'd like to leave this in the passive; I think it's better to have science fiction stories as the subject of the sentence. In the active voice the magazines are mentioned first, which gives the wrong emphasis. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lead says "Munsey Company" while the first section says "Munsey Corporation," are these the same thing?
    I checked a couple of references online and the official name apppears to be "Frank A. Munsey Company". I changed both references to that, but I piped them so it just says "Munsey Company" in the text, which is how it was often referred to. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there a reference saying that Finlay was one of the magazine's most popular artists?
    Yes; I'm away from my references till late tonight so I'll fix this tomorrow. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I checked, and the current reference for those sentences does say this: "Finlay attained his hold upon the devotees of fantasy primarily through his work with FFM", and later refers to his "army of fans". Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:23, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The bibliographic details sections repeats some of the information from the publication history, and also provides an almost excessive level of detail. Do we really need the sentences describing the history of the page count?
    Well, that level of detail is in the sources, and I think it's of interest to some readers -- for example, Mike Ashley does an analysis in one of his books of the interaction between page count, page format, and price, to determine whether certain changes made a magazine more or less profitable. As for the repetition, I think the bibliographic details section should be complete, and shouldn't omit something that is mentioned earlier. Is there duplicated material earlier in the article that you think is unnecessary? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • remained in that format throughout Should this be "throughout its run"?
    I thought it would be inferred by the reader, but since you're asking, I guess that's not the case. Changed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the second paragraph of "Bibliographic details," two sentences in a row contain semicolons, I'm not sure if this is problematic or not.
    I'm probably a bit too fond of semicolons. Changed one of them. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the "References" section, "Inc." is sometimes followed by a period and sometimes not. Also, is there the ISBN for Index to the Science-Fiction Magazines?
    The doubled periods are a consequence of the way that citation template works; glad you spotted that. Fixed. There's no ISBN for the Day; it's pre-ISBN. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I really like the way the first paragraph of the publication history provides context on what else was happening with sf magazines when this title was launched; consider doing the same for the end of its run, since the lead says that 1953 was almost the end of the pulp era but the publication history doesn't follow up on this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cerebellum (talk • contribs)
    I'll take a look at this when I get back to my refs; good idea. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Now done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:49, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Cautious Support Comments I just scanned it quickly while eating and think this is definitely within striking distance of FA status, though I do think the prose needs a little kneading in places. I'll make some changes and jot some notes as I go. Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:37, 2 April 2013 (UTC) Ultimately, I think the writing might still benefit from a little tweak here and there, but the prose is engaging and in character with the subject matter - it is a nice little read. I think we are just about or just over the FA prose-line pending other issues being resolved (which the delegates do anyway). Sounds like you've done plenty of digging for stuff, so I'll take that on good faith for comprehensiveness too. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:36, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In the lead you mention both "1939" and "Sept/Oct 1939"...I am thinking it'd be good to somehow meld them into one mention...just not quite sure how yet.
It's a bit tricky because the only to avoid repeating the year is to include "September/October" in the first mention of the year. I don't see how to do that smoothly; I'll think about it some more. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I've thought about this one and I don't think it's doable. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:36, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That year Munsey decided to take advantage of science fiction's growing popularity by launching Famous Fantastic Mysteries to provide a vehicle for reprinting the most popular fantasy and sf stories from the Munsey magazines - can be trimmed to " That year Munsey took advantage of science fiction's growing popularity by launching Famous Fantastic Mysteries as vehicle for reprinting the most popular fantasy and sf stories from the Munsey magazines" - the meaning is preserved....
Good idea; done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Can we add a descriptor to Mary Gnaedinger at all - was she a novelist, journalist, fan....?
I haven't been able to find anything out about her, unfortunately. Many of the editors of that era get at least a sentence or two in someone's reminiscences, but I've seen nothing at all about her. Searching Google Books for her name and "Popular Publications" brings up a 1934 snippet showing that she edited other magazines for Popular, but I can't see how to usefully work that in. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, just calling her an "editor" seems a bit tautologous....Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:36, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The pulps were dying, partially as a result of the success of paperbacks. - flip clauses here...maybe "The success of paperbacks was contributing to pulps' demise." yep, better. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:36, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
After thinking about this I decided that the reference to paperbacks was a red herring, particularly since it's not claimed to be the only cause of the decline of the pulps. I've rewritten; see what you think. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Famous Fantastic Mysteries changed its policy to begin publishing a complete novel in every issue - this reads ambiguously - i.e. was it "Famous Fantastic Mysteries changed its policy and began publishing a complete novel in every issue" or "Famous Fantastic Mysteries changed its policy of publishing a complete novel in every issue".....
Reworded. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:58, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image check - not all OK. Fair-use issue addressed. Needs another check, 1 image seems copyrighted:

Not sure if I'm doing something wrong, but when I do that search I only find volume 9 number 6 and volume 8 number 2; the issue in question is volume 4 number 4. Can you confirm that you found a renewal for that particular issue? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Try this link http://www.archive.org/stream/catalogofcopy19693232libr#page/393/mode/1up - it's on page 393, end of first and start of middle column. GermanJoe (talk) 10:32, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see it now. I don't see how to get there from the link you originally posted, and since I would like to upload other magazine covers if their copyrights have expired, I'd like to know what I'm doing wrong. Would you have time to post on my talk page with more detailed instructions so I can search more accurately next time?
As for this cover, it was put in for two reasons: to illustrate the new layout after the change from the all-text covers, and as an example of Virgil Finlay's work. If you think that suffices for a fair-use rationale, I will make the change some time this weekend, otherwise I'll delete the image. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:00, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fair-use looks like a good option, if the cover shows the standard layout of the magazine. If available, i would add as many details about the cover design as possible to strenghten the FUR, but identification of the article topic is usually an accepted rationale. (more to your talkpage to limit spam). GermanJoe (talk) 12:12, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
OK, done. I'll go take a look at what you left on my talk page; thanks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:06, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done - tweaked the fair-use arguments a bit more ("n.a." is not sufficient, all NFCC-criteria have to be met). New fair-use location is at File:Famous_Fantastic_Mysteries_August_1942_cover.jpg GermanJoe (talk) 18:48, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – I read through the whole article and made one minor punctuation fix. Otherwise, I think it meets FA standards. The article is fairly short, but the writing, sourcing, and other aspects all appear up to the mark. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:28, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Famous_Fantastic_Mysteries/archive1&oldid=1076191340"