Talk:The Lady's Realm/GA1
Latest comment: 9 years ago by J Milburn in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 11:21, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
This looks like a strong article on an underrepresented topic. Happy to take a look through. J Milburn (talk) 11:21, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- "Thirty-six volumes were produced, from November 1896 to October 1914 (a final volume may have been released in 1915)." Volumes, or issues? How many issues?
- The source (Versteeg, Thomas & Huddleston) says there were 36 volumes (there may have been a 37th). It's my understanding that each volume had numerous issues. I'm not sure if this source is reliable but they note the existence of 235 issues. It's difficult to find more precise information but I'll keep looking. Ruby 2010/2013 17:26, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
- "though University of Queensland researchers" How about "though Margaret Versteeg and colleagues, who produced an index of the fiction published in The Lady's Realm,"
- "Fiction, in the form of short stories and serialisations, were released" Singular/plural
- Perhaps say who Kathryn Ledbetter is? "Historian Kathryn Ledbetter" or something?
- "In the 1900s, Lady's Realm 's fashion editor Marian Pritchard regularly wrote of London and Paris fashions, recommending emerging trends and locations in which to purchase them." Could this sentence be rephrased?
- "The magazine maintained this blend of topics relatively consistently, though it made minor changes to the proportion to which it focused on different topics, for instance focusing less on the nobility and more on the lives of clergymen and governors general." In later years, presumably?
- Perhaps you should note the issue number and date of the cover image in the caption? The image page says 1900, but is that correct?
- "some scholars speculate that World War I may have been a cause" Are the "some scholars" just the three authors of the work you cite, or do they specifically mention that others do? If the former, I'm not keen; if the latter, that's OK.
- I'm surprised we don't have a category for magazines published in London (to mirror something like Category:Magazines published in New York), but we do have Category:Defunct magazines of the United Kingdom. You may also want to consider creating a category to mirror Category:Defunct women's magazines of the United States.
Sources are great, and the image is clearly PD in the US (though more information would not hurt). Plenty of hits on Google Scholar, but mostly just passing mentions. I've made some small fixes- please check that you're happy. J Milburn (talk) 11:43, 4 January 2015 (UTC)