Talk:Tops in Science Fiction

Tops in Science Fiction has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: October 3, 2014. (Reviewed version).

Magazines Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Science Fiction Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Tops in Science Fiction/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zanimum (talk · contribs) 22:01, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review. -- Zanimum (talk) 22:01, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review! Pretty much painless! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:17, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

I'm thinking that the reference to Planet Stories in the lead should also be wikilinked.
Agreed; done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:58, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Bibliographic details", footnotes, references all are a pass; I haven't read the history section yet. -- Zanimum (talk) 21:57, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did my review on a USB, and then left the USB at work. So re-reading the history section, great stuff. I'm impressed both with your prose and with the very fact that such a wealth of sources exist on such a brief publication. Great context, placing the work in the larger industry trends.

Anyway, there's really nothing left for me to do, other than pass the article as GA. -- Zanimum (talk) 23:44, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(Oh, are there any Wikiprojects this page could be associated with? Talk page is a little bare of templates. Not necessary, but an option.) -- Zanimum (talk) 23:46, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've done this. Protonk (talk) 15:30, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:16, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]