Talk:Wells and Wellington affair

Merge/rename proposal
This article is wrongly named as it is not about the journal but solely about the "Wells and Wellington affair" (W&W). Basically all text is about the last few issues in which the W&W articles appeared. There is also discussion of works by W&W that appeared in completely different publications. This should either be renamed "Wells and Wellington affair", or perhaps merged to Richard W. Wells, where there currently is scant discussion of this affair, but which seems to belong there (Wells apparently being the more important actor).

I have not put a "merge to" or other template on this article as it will apparently be an FA in a few days. It would be good if the above changes could be enacted before that time. --Randykitty (talk) 16:05, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  18:21, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

The article is now at Wells and Wellington Affair, but the first sentence uses lower case on affair: The "Wells and Wellington affair" is a name ... Sandy Georgia (Talk)  21:33, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I hadn't intended it to be; based on other affairs (1, 2, 3, 4) it seems like lowercase makes the most sense and is largely consistent across the encyclopedia (though not entirely). —Collint c 21:50, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thought so ... you will need to ping Wehwalt to work this out. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  22:03, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Everything else listed at Featured_articles is lower case. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  22:32, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Will the redirect, 'document to affair', be deleted eventually? ~ cygnis insignis 15:34, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Background gaps
How did a first-year undergraduate student become the editor of a newly established scientific journal? Was/is it usual practice in the relevant area? --Paul_012 (talk) 18:09, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * This is not clear from the available sources. From what I can surmise, Wells was at least in his mid-20s by this point and had already done some work as a collector for a few museums, so while he was a first-year student, he wasn't wholly unqualified, and his role was largely focused on the production of the journal with the editorial board managing most of its content seemingly. I cannot say if it's usual practice or not but the AJH was a small journal so it doesn't strike me as too odd. I added a little bit to the article about Wells's background as a collector. —Collint c 18:28, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

WP:REFERS?
As this is an FA, I’m more curious than anything. The opening sentence uses “...is a name given to...”. I can’t see any discussion of WP:REFERS in the FA, so wondering why this is considered ok? DeCausa (talk) 18:53, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * That was just a leftover from some late changes made just before TFA (see above on this talk page); I attempted a fix. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  18:56, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Something still seems amiss, maybe "describes" or: The Wells and Wellington affair was a controversy ... ~ cygnis insignis 19:03, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Or that :) ~ cygnis insignis 19:04, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks! DeCausa (talk) 19:05, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Additional source
I'm not sure how much overlap there is, but the WikiSpecies article on Wells mentions another source: (the article is also available here). --Pokechu22 (talk) 00:47, 19 March 2021 (UTC)