Talk:Fantastic Universe

Check GA

Checking with criterias at Wikipedia:What is a good article?:

1. "Well-written." Yes, I believe it is.
2. "It is factually accurate and verifiable. " Yes, it properly references several books that appear to be standard references.
3. "It is broad in its coverage." As far as I can tell, it is.
4. "It follows the neutral point of view policy". I can't see how it could not.
5. "It is stable" -- I don't see why it wouldn't be
6. "It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic." Yes, one cover image should be enough to illustrate the magazine

Fred-Chess 16:58, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Factual Error?

I believe that the version of the magazine that started in 1953 is the second incarnation of Fantastic universe Science Fiction I own a copy of Fantastic Universe Science Fiction; January 1950 Volume 9 No. 1 published by King Size Publications. This implies to me the the magazine was first published in 1942 and ran for at least 9 years.

The Fantastic Universe Science Fiction logo in the upper left corner of the Wikipedia picture is identical the the logo on my 1950 copy which implies a linear connection to the later publications.

Other than this one copy of the magazine in my possession I don't have enough facts to correct the article myself.

user Ostynew May 31, 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ostynew (talk • contribs) 23:09, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Very interesting. Could you possibly post a list of the contents? I'd like to see if it's identical with the vol 9 no 1 that in the usual series. Also, could you take a look at the masthead and see what the copyright date is there? Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 23:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

three words

scraping the barrel 62.232.34.3 (talk) 06:52, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

not at all --86.138.9.193 (talk) 09:18, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Correct artist?

I have a copy of the edition illustrated in the photo. It is in the attic and not readily accessible, but I thought that that particular cover painting was by Emsh. Can you please check? thanks Jellytussle (talk) 16:42, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

I just checked my copy; it is credited to Schomburg on the contents page. Mike Christie (talk) 16:46, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Fantastic Universe. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060902143313/http://isfdb.tamu.edu/wiki/index.php/Magazine%3AFantastic_Universe_Science_Fiction to http://isfdb.tamu.edu/wiki/index.php/Magazine%3AFantastic_Universe_Science_Fiction
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060902143313/http://isfdb.tamu.edu/wiki/index.php/Magazine%3AFantastic_Universe_Science_Fiction to http://isfdb.tamu.edu/wiki/index.php/Magazine%3AFantastic_Universe_Science_Fiction

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

WP:URFA/2020 notes

Mike Christie - I agree that this is overall looking satisfactory and will mark this as such at URFA, but a few comments below:

• " this was a combination familiar to science fiction fans from their years together at Thrilling Wonder Stories, which Merwin had edited from 1945 to 1951" - should Thrilling Wonder Stories be italicized here?
• Is isfdb still considered a high-enough quality source for FAs? Hog Farm _Talk 16:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Fixed the italics; thanks for spotting that. I realized that that para could do with another source so I added one which led me to spotting another minor issue. No, ISFDB isn't acceptable at FAC -- I removed it here (did I miss it anywhere?) and will do so gradually at the other sf magazines that are featured. I haven't used it for some years. It's a pity as it's definitely "reliable" in the usual sense of the word, particularly for old magazines, but it doesn't meet our requirements. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)