Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cosmic Stories and Stirring Science Stories/archive1


 * 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 Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 16:58, 6 March 2015 (UTC).

Cosmic Stories and Stirring Science Stories

 * Nominator(s): Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:51, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Two early science fiction magazines together in one article this time; the two have almost identical histories. These two were unusual in that they had no budget for fiction: the editor had to get his stories free from friends and acquaintances. Since his friends included several writers who would go on to become famous in sf, this worked out better than you might expect. The magazine also features some of Hannes Bok's early work, and since it is all out of copyright I've been able to include two of his covers -- he had a very distinctive and characterful style. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:51, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Images are appropriately licensed and captioned. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:24, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Nikki. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:29, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree they appear to be fine, but it'd be good to state your source for copyright non-renewal explicitly. Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:15, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I checked via, so it would be easy to add that, but I'm not sure where the standard place to add it would be -- the license template doesn't have parameters. Where does this information usually go for out of copyright images? Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 10:50, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I usually link right above the license tag. File:Alex_Schomburg_-_Harl_Vincent_-_Marvel_Science_Stories_for_April-May_1939_-_Illustration_for_Newscast.jpg might be a good template. By the way, Abebooks has a couple copies of these magazines available, so the images might be improveable. Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:01, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Done; I didn't include the license in that parameter because it appears lower down; not sure if that's the standard way to do it or not, but it's what happens when you use the wizard to do uploads. I have copies of all these magazines, and can scan the covers if you're interested, but unfortunately they're in boxes at the moment (along with about 5,000 other old sf magazines).  If you really want to restore these old magazines I could keep you busy for a very long time once I get the boxes unpacked! Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 11:28, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I think it would be a major boon. We could start with trying to get major artists and authors, and go from there. Have to be vigorous about copyright checking, but we always need to be vigorous about that. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:35, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll scan some; I'll check with you before doing it, and it'll be a while, because they're in boxes, but I think this will be great. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 13:49, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Comments from JM
Generally very strong. I made some fixes- please double-check them. J Milburn (talk) 16:57, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you could more clearly clarify the relationship between the two publications in the lead? Also, perhaps the alternative name should be mentioned and bolded?
 * Both done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The last paragraph in the publication history section could probably do with some attention
 * I tweaked the tense in one place, but I may not be seeing what you're seeing -- can you be specific? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The "had he been able to achieve it" thing is throwing me- are you suggesting that he was lying in the advert? I'm also unclear what "In the event" adds. J Milburn (talk) 19:40, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The sources don't say he was lying, but personally I think it was likely to be a bait and switch. That issue of Writers' Digest appeared before any issues of either Cosmic or Stirring had appeared, and there's no question Wollheim knew he couldn't pay that rate initially.  At best he was hoping that by the time he received manuscripts he might be able to start paying something, if the magazines were successful, but most likely if he liked a story he planned to offer little or nothing for it.  The payments Kornbluth received were well below half a cent a word, and I'm not aware that any other writers were paid at all, though they may well have been.  It's possible that he believed the Albings would pay that rate after two or three issues, but there's no way to tell.
 * What I meant to convey in that paragraph was (a) the fact that he did offer a payment rate, before the magazine launched, and (b) to position that rate against the rates other magazines were paying, so that a reader understands what that rate indicates, and (c) to make it clear that he did not in fact manage to pay the rate. "In the event" is meant to be a transition: I meant no more than "As it turned out".  What do you think could be done to improve the paragraph? Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 00:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm fascinated by this printer error- perhaps it could be expanded upon in a footnote if the information is too trivial for the main body?
 * It's an interesting story but I don't think I have the sources to be explicit. Knight's story is about little alien invaders whose bodies were incredibly resilient, so that bullets would cause their bodies to distort but would not harm them.  They call humans "the Brittle People".  The story is only a page or two long, and the point, if I recall correctly, is the realization at the end that the little aliens are invincible.  This depends on the reader understanding who the Little People are (the aliens) and who the Brittle People are (the humans).  In the opening sentence, the printer changed "Brittle People" to "Little People", presumably because he assumed it was a mistake on the writer's part.  I met Damon Knight years ago and asked him to sign my copy of that issue, and he did, and also corrected the misprint, writing "Brittle People, dammit!" above the first sentence, and signing it.  If I can find that issue in my basement I could take a picture of that correction with his signature and include that in the article I suppose, but I'm not sure that's sufficient evidence for a discussion in the text.  As it happens, Damon told me he didn't own a copy of that issue any more, so I later found one and sent it to him, which was a nice thing to be able to do. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 11:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * What a fantastic story- both about the misprint and your interactions with Knight. A Google Book search suggests that sources may exist. Any details you can include would be very interesting. J Milburn (talk) 19:40, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I had no idea the details were out there; thanks for finding that! I've added a footnote; how does that look? Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 00:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
 * "In his autobiographical anthology" I note that our article on the book suggests that it is a story anthology rather than autobiographical?
 * It's both -- it's a collection of all the stories which to that point had not been collected in his short story collections, interspersed with autobiographical reminiscences. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * "Wollheim later commented to Damon Knight that because of the payment he could sue Asimov for royalties whenever his name appeared in print." A nice factoid, but it's not completely clear now- too many pronouns for clarity.
 * Fixed, I think. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * "In contrast to Tremaine's attitude, John W. Campbell, who in 1938 had taken over from Tremaine as editor of the leading science fiction magazine, Astounding Science Fiction, was not concerned by Albing's policy." Again, a little convoluted
 * I cut the clause about Campbell taking over from Tremaine; it's true but not strictly necessary to the story. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * "Although Campbell was proved right when the magazines ceased publication" Sorry to be picky, but Campbell was certainly not proven right by the fact the magazine ceased publication. Perhaps you could say "Although the magazine did cease publication after a relatively short amount of time, ..."
 * Thompson's comment in the source is that Campbell's "prognosis" was proved correct, by which he appears to mean Campbell's assertion that the magazines wouldn't be competitive. I think ceasing publication is evidence that they weren't competitive, which I think is what Thompson meant.  I've changed this to "Campbell's prediction"; does that help? Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 11:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * How about "although Campbell was correct that the magazine was unable to compete with paying magazines" or something like it? Technically, for Thompson's preduction to be proved correct, it would have to be unsuccessful because of the low quality of the content, which goes against the following setence. J Milburn (talk) 19:40, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's definitely better. Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 00:05, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
 * There seems to be some inconsistency between the use of "science fiction" and "sf"
 * It's deliberate variation -- I use "sf" because "science fiction" is a long enough phrase that is repeated often enough in these articles to get tedious. "Sf" is the standard abbreviation, but I don't think it's necessary to use it all the time. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 11:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Your edits all look good to me. Thanks for the review. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 11:21, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I will get back to this in the next few days- sorry for the delay! J Milburn (talk) 16:56, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Some quick further comments: I've made some more tweaks. J Milburn (talk) 22:58, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Quotes, even in the lead, should always be cited.
 * Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:54, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Was the crucial typo in the first sentence or the last sentence of the story?
 * The first. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:54, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * "Some months later Wollheim was able to find another publisher," Perhaps mention the name of the publisher here?
 * Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:54, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Your edits look fine; thanks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:54, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Support on prose and content. I've not looked into the sources/images in detail. Great work. J Milburn (talk) 18:30, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Support -- recusing from coord duties: Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:21, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * No dab or dup links
 * Prose looks good, I just tweaked here and there
 * Structure is simple and straightforward
 * Content/detail seems sufficient, especially given the short life of these mags
 * I'll rely on the review above for image licensing
 * Sources all look reliable and happy with the formatting
 * Thanks for the review and support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:54, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * No prob -- I forgot to add, just picking up on your nom statement, that the covers you've been able to include are indeed very special! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:00, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Yes, I think Bok's work is really unusual and deserves to be more widely known.  The May 1941 Cosmic cover, in particular, is terrific. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 23:24, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

One nitpick: *"Knight would later become a member of the Futurians, but he was still living in Oregon at the time the story appeared in print" - We haven't established that location had anything to do with membership. Should this be explicitly mentioned? Karanacs (talk) 20:27, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Good point. They were a New York group; I've now mentioned that before the comment about Knight -- does that fix it? Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 23:18, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
 * That fixes it :) Karanacs (talk) 15:50, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Support Karanacs (talk) 15:50, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

-- Laser brain  (talk)  16:58, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.