Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tales of Wonder (magazine)/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 Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 23:36, 16 May 2015.

Tales of Wonder (magazine)

 * Nominator(s): Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:00, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Tales of Wonder was the first British science fiction magazine aimed at the adult market. It was successful and encouraged at least one other publisher to launch a science fiction magazine in the UK, but World War II brought paper shortages and mobilization for the editor, Walter Gillings, and the magazine was forced to close. The magazine is now a collector's item; it includes early work by John Wyndham, and the first professional sales by Arthur C. Clarke. The article is short, but I believe I've exhausted the available sources. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:00, 12 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Support, I would agree that you've exhausted sources, and that the article is as long as it needs to be to sufficiently inform readers. As with all your articles, the prose itself is very readable. --  Zanimum (talk) 21:43, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks! And thanks for the support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 22:17, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Support. Well done, the article meets the FA criteria. --Carioca (talk) 22:20, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:35, 15 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Support: My concerns were addressed. Thank you. Praemonitus (talk) 15:18, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment: Overall it looks good. I have just a couple of concerns:


 * two of the paragraphs are overly long; one in each of the primary sections. Please consider splitting them appropriately for less tedious reading.
 * Done; I had a bit of trouble deciding where to split the first one, but I think the result is OK. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:25, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * The first footnote (Ashley, Time Machines) is missing a year. Two of the subsequent entries are missing 'pp.' for the page range. Please make them consistent.
 * Oops; done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:25, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Praemonitus (talk) 18:53, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Image review
 * File:Talesofwonder.jpg: FUR is very minimal - should do a better job of explaining the rationale for inclusion and how it meets NFCC. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Interesting, I just assumed it was public domain. The UK rule is 70 years from the artist's death, but is it actually the corporation that would own the rights to this image, in which case, does the 70 years start immediately, as is practice in some countries? --  Zanimum (talk) 17:35, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I've expanded the FUR as much as I think I can; it's my understanding that a low-resolution image of a magazine is accepted as a fair use image if all magazine covers are copyrighted, so that the reader can see what the magazine looked like.  that would be great, but I'm not sufficiently expert on copyright to know.  If it turns out to be true, please let me know -- in that case I could add a couple more magazine covers to the article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 22:31, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Either way, the image would still have been copyrighted in the UK on 1 Jan 1996 and so is still copyrighted in the US - see WP:NUSC. Mike, can you please include on the image description page the date of the cover, copyright holder if known, and something other than "no" for "portion used"? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:56, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:09, 20 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Comments Seems comprehensive and well-written. A few comments:
 * Lede
 * "Payment rates were low" I would make this clearer that this was rates for stories and whatnot. Perhaps if the bit about the material came first and then the phrase quoted above, this would be clearer.
 * Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The number of issues seems like a useful addition late in the first paragraph.
 * Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * "in the U.K. market." I would cut both because it is implied and because it repeats the word "market".
 * I cut "market" but left "U.K." since the U.S. market was already established; the question was whether a native British magazine could survive. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Publication history
 * "also available in the U.K." I would cut "in the U.K." as surplusage and a repetition.
 * Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * "the publisher of The Strand magazine" italicisation?
 * Oops. Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 21:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * "in the group" cut for similar reasons as "in the U.K."
 * Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * "a single issue" Is issue the proper U.K. term, or "number"?
 * One sees both, but to my ear "number" is a little more formal, and "issue" sounds more natural. I'd be OK with changing it if needed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 21:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * "10/6" "10s 6d (ten shillings sixpence" might make it clearer to the reader without needing to click the link and puzzle out from the article what 10/6 was.
 * Done. 21:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * " but newer writers were glad of the chance to develop a British market for their work, though most American writers were unimpressed." I'm not sure you should have both "but" and "though" leading phrases in the same sentence, especially back to back.
 * I hesitated over this and finally came up with a rewording; see if that looks OK. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * A space is needed prior to the third sentence in the third paragraph.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:26, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:57, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Support All looks good.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:12, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done. Can you verify the publisher for Tuck? That punctuation seems odd. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:28, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The book's in a box in the basement now, but I have other books from the same publisher, and they do use that colon in the middle of the name. Thanks for the review. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 11:10, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 23:36, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.