Template:Did you know nominations/Science Fiction Chronicle

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 11:28, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

• ... that an American magazine Science Fiction Chronicle was described as "an alternative voice for the sf community" and "something of an East Coast institution"? Source: https://sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/science_fiction_chronicle
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Nazareth Hall Preparatory Seminary, Template:Did you know nominations/Al-Moghraqa

_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC).

• Piotrus The article is long enough and enough with no copyright violations. Two QPQs have been completed while in backlog mode. The hook is directly cited and interesting. A big issue is that sf-encyclopedia, Fancyclopedia, and ISFDB are user-edited. SL93 (talk) 02:16, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
  • @SL93: Thanks for taking a look. SFE aka The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction is a very reliable outlet and not user generated (unless we consider Britannica etc. user generated). Now, you are right about the two others, but they are just used as an easy online backup ref for reliable refs (just check "[9]" and "[11]"); I don't think they are used for any facts that are not backed up by more reliable sources. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:09, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

• That works for me. Approved. SL93 (talk) 14:12, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

• AirshipJungleman29 and Theleekycauldron Can you promote this if everything checks out? I'm not sure who exactly to ping other than Airship because I haven't entirely been following who has all completed recent promotions. SL93 (talk) 13:28, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
  • No objection if Airship does it, but intrigue-wise, this hook isn't my favorite? I also probably wouldn't be able to do this promptly. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 23:10, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

• Piotrus I am fine with the hook, but apparently no one wants to promote this one. Do you have an idea for any ALTs? SL93 (talk) 00:56, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
  • @SL93 and Theleekycauldron: Here are some ALTs - maybe one of them will have more luck. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:19, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

ALT1: ... that Science Fiction Chronicle, an American science fiction magazine, was initially a section of the fanzine Algol?

ALT2: ... that Science Fiction Chronicle won the Hugo Award for Best Semiprozine in 1993 and 1994?

ALT3: ... that Science Fiction Chronicle was edited by Andrew I. Porter for over two decades before he was controversially fired in 2002?

I am approving ALT2 and ALT3 as cited and the most interesting. SL93 (talk) 19:04, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm a bit concerned about ALT3 w/r/t WP:DYKBLP? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 08:52, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

Theleekycauldron Ok, but what about ALT2? The two oldest nominations on the approved page are hooks that I reviewed, and I am the main editor who has been promoting lately. SL93 (talk) 22:47, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

mm, i dunno, ALT2 isn't particularly unusual to me. Not only does one magazine win that award every year, and lots of magazines win lots of prose awards every year, but it's not even like this magazine is unusual for winning this award twice in a row: Locus has won it 22 times, including a streak of 7 consecutive wins right before SF Chronicle (heh) won its two. I'm sorry to be kind of filibustering this – maybe Launchballer would willing to promote it – but I don't really want to put my signature on it. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 01:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm not at all sure this will fly, but given IFSD's page on the 2002 issues of SFC, it appears that Andy Porter's final issue was 226, published in July 2002 (see https://www.isfdb.org/cgi-bin/title.cgi?2116070). Given that SFC ceased publication with issue 267, June 2006, the following might work should that July 2002 fact be added to the article:

• ALT4: ... that Science Fiction Chronicle ceased publication four years after the firing of its founder and editor of over two decades?

This wouldn't be the first magazine to die not long after its founder was no longer in the picture, but the hook might be interesting enough. Pinging Piotrus, SL93 and theleekycauldron for their thoughts. —BlueMoonset (talk) 22:15, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

@BlueMoonset: I am fine with that. And here's another ALT. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:00, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

• ALT5: ... that two decades after it launched, the magazine Science Fiction Chronicle changed its name to just Chronicle to avoid being confused with the San Francisco Chronicle?

@Piotrus:I think this is the only one that would work for a general audience, honestly. DS (talk) 04:34, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Approving ALT5. SL93 (talk) 17:24, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

@Piotrus and SL93: Oh my god! Obvious joke, staring me right in the face:

• ALT6: ... that the SF Chronicle is headquartered in Virginia?
• ALT6a: ... that the SF Chronicle is not headquartered in San Francisco?

Possibly for April Fools' day, could use some workshopping. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 08:41, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

theleekycauldron Why not ALT5? I'm honestly getting pissed off that since I'm the main person building preps, nominations that I nominate or review are not getting promoted. I even asked for help at Wikipedia talk:Did you know#What I can't promote. This isn't fair to not just myself, and it's starting to turn me off of reviewing. I'm not mad at you, but I'm mad in general. SL93 (talk) 23:46, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

• @SL93: In the last few months, speaking from the perspective of a DYK regular with 10+ years here, I noticed a major uptick in complains about my noms in terms of 'hook not interesting'. It could be subjective, but unless criteria changed, or my hooks changed, then it seems some folks are becoming a bit... bored? Not blaming anyone, but I will say that yes, I am somewhat annoyed with the DYK system recently due to what I consider subjective and unfair complains 'your hook is too bland'. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:53, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm happy to look at ALT5, I just haven't had time and that suggestion struck me. Would be happy to talk more about your broader concerns, but again, a lot of stuff is slipping through the cracks for me at the moment :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 10:57, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

I don't mind this being kept for April, although 5 months since creation...? Really? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:51, 23 January 2025 (UTC)