Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Magazines Information & Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Magazines Links at HealthHaven.com

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Magazines page.
Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith Avoid personal attacks Be welcoming

WikiProject Magazines

(Rated NA-Class)

	v • d • e This page 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.
NA	This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

[edit] Query re 944 magazine

When I came upon a reference to a magazine called "944", I turned to Wikipedia for information, but we have no article. (The 944 article is about the year, with a hatnote to Porsche 944.) Does this publication merit an article? In a bit of research, I found this source describing 944 as a lifestyle magazine that publishes seven regional editions. JamesMLane t c 00:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Naming conventions

It seems to me the first task of this WikiProject should be to agree on naming conventions for magazine article titles and then sort out the inconsistencies. There are two main issues; capitalisation, and the use of the word 'magazine'. For example, Time magazine is styled 'TIME' on its cover but its article is entitled 'Time (magazine)'. This seems the best approach to me, but there are a lot of article titles that aren't set up that way; CHESS magazine's name is in caps on its cover and that's preserved in its article title. The article for PONY Magazine doesn't have a cover shot so I don't know whether it's in caps, or whether the word 'magazine' is present on the cover. It seems to me the convention should be to spell the magazine's title in mixed case (except for abbreviations of course, as in PC Magazine), and to only include the word 'Magazine' where this is an intrinsic part of the title, such as The New York Times Magazine; where disambiguation is needed, the suffix (magazine) should be added. There are a few trickier questions that need discussion too - for example, does the frequency of publication constitute part of the title? Clearly it does in the case of Publishers Weekly, but what about Mangalam Weekly, just described as Mangalam in the article or Justice Magazine, aka Justice Weekly? Colonies Chris (talk) 12:44, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Some good questions (some of which have bothered me in the past, too). To give my opinions in order:

Capitals: Unless the magazine uses initials, or the use of capitals has some official standing, I would assume that the magazine's title is only represented that way on the cover for effect. TIME ought to be Time in English, but as far as I can tell, the official TIME site always calls it TIME (though copyright "Time Inc.").
Magazine: This one really bugs me, but IMO "Magazine" should only be added if the official title includes the word, and "(magazine)" otherwise if disambiguation is required. Thus, TIME (magazine) would be correct.
Frequency: Again, only included if the official title includes it. For that, some external referencing might be required.

Of course, all of these answers depend on what the magazine publisher deems: Again, PONY probably ought to be Pony, but the cover and description here suggests PONY Magazine is correct.

So, I think I'm in broad agreement with you (except TIME/Time, though I haven't checked the discussion page of that article to see whether this has come up before!) Stephenb (Talk) 13:27, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

It's a slightly deceptive issue but easy to clarify: A common noun is lower case. A proper noun is capitalized. A title is capitalized and italicized. The fact that Cat Fancy has a cover logo of all caps might simply be the result of a designer's decision, and it doesn't change the rule of how a title appears in print. The fact that Cat Fancy is given in all caps on the publication's web site is a promotional usage akin to ad copy, and that still does not change the simple rule that the title is presented as Cat Fancy in conventional writing. Pepso2 (talk) 23:17, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood - we're not talking typography, or grammar, but the correct title of a magazine. For instance, TIME is almost universally represented in capitals, and whether or not the correct way (in English) would be to write Time is immaterial: the publisher and copyright holder of the title can specify any use of lower case or capitals they like. Stephenb (Talk) 09:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) where Time is given as one of the examples. Pepso2 (talk) 18:03, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Interesting, but it's not followed everywhere (otherwise, iPod ought to be Ipod). There are plenty of examples where this guideline is broken, and the manufacturer's trademark lettering is used, and I personally think it is currently incorrect in the case of TIME Stephenb (Talk) 22:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

In the talk archives of Time (magazine) there's a discussion on how to name the article. Back in Jan 2006 a proposal to change it to "TIME" had some support, but not enough to succeed. Colonies Chris (talk) 10:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] To Be

I just realised that now I'm a part of this WP, I want to ask a question. I've been watching this article about a magazine (To Be) for a while, and it is stub status. If anyone has any information about it, please contribute. Here is the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/To_Be_(magazine) --Flash flash; —Preceding undated comment was added at 15:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC).

[edit] Should we include online magazines in this section?

I was going to add an online publication to the list of Canadian magazines, but I realized it was an online-only publication, and wondered whether there is a better place to add it?

(wiki newbie, pls excuse any faux pas)

Wikimanlogin (talk) 22:26, 2 January 2009 (UTC) wikimanlogin

[edit] Notability criteria for magazines?

Are there any notability criteria for magazines? This goes especially for niche magazines. There's currently a spat about a magazine called Christian Order where the argument seems to be that if it caters for a minority interest then it is likely to bt non notable. Could anyone point to any precedents or criteria so that we don't get into an WP:IDONTLIKEIT bun fight?

JASpencer (talk) 15:46, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] How about having an ISSN number?

I would consider subscriber numbers in the thousands, or the existence of an ISSN number, to be a possible indicator of notability. Sometimes a company newsletter will have an ISSN, but that's pretty rare.

Audited subscription records would have to be documented by a reliable, third-party source. rhyre (talk) 08:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I think it's the other way around: not having an ISSN is an almost sure sign of non-notability and magazines without one will only very exceptionally be notable. But having an ISSN is nothing out of the ordinary, they can be obtained very easily. --Crusio (talk) 09:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Academic Journals - sister project

Hi everyone,

I noticed this project via Talk:Partisan Review. In case you havent seen, there is a Academic Journals project, and we have been including some magazines within our scope because there wasnt a more appropriate project at the time, but .. you can have them! ;-)

You may find our discussions useful, but they are limited due to the lack of people who are involved in the discussions. Notability has come up quite often. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 01:38, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:22, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

[edit] CFD on categories Semimonthly-Fortnightly-Biweekly-Semiweekly magazines

The related Category:Semimonthly magazines, Category:Fortnightly magazines, Category:Biweekly magazines (plus the possible Category:Semiweekly magazines, Category:Twice-monthly magazines, Category:Two-weekly magazines, Category:Twice-weekly magazines) have been nominated for merging, renaming, and/or splitting. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for Discussion page.

— The Little Blue Frog (ribbit) 05:28, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] AfD on Dispatches (magazine)

I have nominated Dispatches (magazine) for deletion, as a result on a discussion on WP:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard that gave circumstantial evidence that the article was created by staff of the magazine (or a meatpuppet of same).

Because deletion is not the correct cure in this case if the subject is indeed notable, I tried but failed to find notability guidelines for magazines. My gut feeling is that a magazine with only three issues out yet would have to be quite extraordinary to be notable already, and consequently extraordinary sources for its notability should be required. But it is possible that I'm totally off the mark here, so I'd appreciate if some members of this WikiProject would go to WP:Articles for deletion/Dispatches (magazine) and weigh in. Thanks. –Henning Makholm (talk) 00:18, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] WHAT TO DO WHEN SOMEONE WHO HAS A CONFLICT KEEPS POSTING NEGATIVE/DEROGATORY EDITS

Am having to monitor our page, Fade In, as twice now someone who has a conflict with us keeps posting defamatory and vulgar edits. How do we monitor this, put an end to this or find out specifically who is doing this? They should be booted from membership. (Eightofspades (talk) 17:27, 23 April 2009 (UTC))

I'll watch it, too. It would be helpful to provide perspective by expanding the article with some material from third party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases DGG (talk) 01:28, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to add Full Quality Scale to Project Banner Template

I propose to add the FQS categories to this project's template, because the parent projects, Journalism and Media already use those too, and because it will further organize the articles which are automatically dumped into the "NA-Class" category, like the template, project and disambig pages, etc. --Funandtrvl (talk) 16:59, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] x Magazines and Defunct x Magazines

I think the Category:American computer magazines should be split into its existing category and (new) Category:Defunct American computer magazines. It is a very cluttered category. There already is Category:Defunct computer magazines.

Is the split I propose a good idea?
Do I create a subcategories under both Category:American computer magazines and Category:Defunct computer magazines? patsw (talk) 20:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Without objection, I started Category:Defunct American computer magazines. It is turning out to be quite a large category. patsw (talk) 00:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Turns out only 27 are currently published and 49 were defunct. A few were web sites improperly called "magazines". Perhaps a Category:Defunct British computer magazines category can be created for more cleanup. patsw (talk) 02:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Articles for deletion

Since you guys don't seem to have a notice board for articles in your project's scope that are undergoing deletion review, I'm posting this here...

The article for Girls and Corpses is undergoing deletion review at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Girls and Corpses. Dismas|^(talk) 02:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] World Aircraft Information Files

I have created an article about the British part-work World Aircraft Information Files.

I would be grateful if some of you might take a quick look at it, and tell me how it can be improved.

As you will see, I have put a lot of work into created wikilinks for every File in the partwork, but I want advice on how to make it better. This could include any categories it could go in that I haven't done yet, etc.

Thanks. PhantomSteve (Contact Me, My Contribs) 13:44, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] GA reassessment of Anna Wintour

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the article which you can see at Talk:Anna Wintour/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:35, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Manga anthologies?

Does this project cover manga anthologies such as Weekly Shōnen Jump? If so, you'll find a good list of additional articles at List of manga magazines. 「ダイノガイ千？！」^{? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000} 17:10, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Stanley Sheinbaum

Why is there no mention of Stanley Sheinbaum, who also was a principal in the publication?

172.131.150.153 (talk) 23:29, 15 August 2009 (UTC) Steve Clar

[edit] Categories mess

The discussion here might interest other participants in this project. I feel rather overwhelmed, so advice/help is more than welcome... --Crusio (talk) 14:07, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Contents