Talk:The Fortnightly Review

This article was nominated for deletion on 18/5/2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

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.

It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.

Wikipedians in the United Kingdom may be able to help!

The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Sorry![edit]

Hit intro while writing edit summary.--Technopat (talk) 22:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No citation[edit]

Removed the claim the 'Fortnightly Review' had been incorporated into the Contemporary Review, since it had no citation, and the Contemporary Review article states its future is 'uncertain as of 2013" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2804:431:C7CA:DD21:5493:8A7C:FB50:69E8 (talk) 14:14, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A different Fortnightly Review[edit]

There is a different, and much less well-known, Fortnightly Review: a US Catholic journal published in St. Louis, MO. It ran for at least 40 years; a sample can be found here (among other years and issues) at Archive Org: Vol. XL (1933)

Bill (talk) 13:22, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]