Talk:History of US science fiction and fantasy magazines to 1950

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of US science fiction and fantasy magazines to 1950 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

History of US science fiction and fantasy magazines to 1950 is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 11, 2019.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 13, 2017	Featured article candidate	Promoted

History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Magazines Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Science Fiction High‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Remaining tasks before FAC

Fix any ref errors
Check for appropriate linking
Go through Tymn/Ashley and check to see if any other magazines are worth a mention -- e.g. Swan Yankee, Captain Zero.
Copyedit
Duplicate links

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Additional magazines that may be worth mentioning: The Arkham Sampler, Fantasy Book, Captain Zero, Doctor Death, Fantasy Fiction (1950), Oriental Stories, Other Worlds, hero pulps with sf tropes such as The Shadow and Doc Savage, Worlds Beyond. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:43, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All now done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:41, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When is sf in caps, and when in l/c?

This is clearly something you know and I don't, so please explain away. This article is very consistent in its use of the abbreviation "sf". The article Science fiction seems similarly consistent on "SF". Is there a rule, protocol or whatever? Or is it more like the ENGVAR situation where, without other overriding reasons, it is just editor preference and who got their preferred version in first? I do get it that this is hardly of earth-shattering importance and does not affect the quality of the article! I just thought it was an interesting distinction. Cheers 82.39.96.55 (talk) 12:24, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Both are used and both are perfectly acceptable, but in any given article it's obviously better to be internally consistent. I generally use "sf" in the articles I work on because that's the form used in the online SF Encyclopedia, one of the best sources for the genre. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:37, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant, thanks so much Mike Christie for the interesting answer. I totally get it about the internal consistency, and thanks also for the excellent link – I had no idea that there was such a thing and I am greatly enjoying looking at it. Cheers 82.39.96.55 (talk) 22:49, 11 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]