Jump to content

Talk:Famous Fantastic Mysteries

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by Cewbot (talk | contribs) at 05:13, 14 February 2024 (Maintain {{WPBS}}: 2 WikiProject templates. Keep majority rating "FA" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 2 same ratings as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Science Fiction}}, {{WikiProject Magazines}}.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Featured articleFamous Fantastic Mysteries 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.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 18, 2018.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 25, 2013Featured article candidatePromoted

C. A. Russell, re this edit, I think the right tense is past, not present. WP:WAS says the distinction is whether there is a definite expiration date. An issue of a magazine is an object that still exists, but the magazine is a whole is defunct, so I think dead magazines should be "was". Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:20, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Thumperward, your mess. -- C. A. Russell (talk) 11:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Per policy, I have restored the sentence version approved at FAC. Until this is discussed, it would be preferable if parties did not edit war over it. serial # 13:20, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Despite your attempt to shut down the side that you happen to disagree over procedural issues—by appealing in the direction of non-policy and trying to contextualize it as policy—I have reverted. I'm not backing down on this by ceding to someone's attempt to unilaterally decide what is what. We can take this to the 3RR limit, ending in my favor temporarily. From there, we can watch the discussion unfold as *actual* guidelines are upheld—and we end up using the correct tense. -- C. A. Russell (talk) 14:29, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have no plans to revert further; I'm happy to abide by the outcome of the discussion here. C. A. Russell, I don't think citing BRD, as I did, or FAOWN, as Serial Number 54129 did, is an attempt to shut down discussion. The latter is policy, after all, and though the former is not, it's generally agreed to be good practice. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Error in Sources

[edit]

References 9 and 10 cite Weinberg, "Biographical Dictionary", but in the Sources section "A Biographical Dictionary of Science Fiction and Fantasy Artists" it appears with the ISBN 0-313-21221-X, which is not correct, as it belongs to the previous source: "Science Fiction, Fantasy and Weird Fiction Magazines". The year of publication also appears to be incorrect. Furado (talk) 10:54, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed; thanks for spotting that. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:45, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]