Talk:Mother Earth (journal)

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.

The intro to this article does not in anyway explain what the Mother Earth Journal is in anyway. Someone familiar with the publication should update it to explain just what subject of the journal was. Is this some sort of anarchist publication?

--Cab88 (talk) 09:32, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A new introduction has been added to the article in order to avoid confusion as to what kind of publication this is. This publication is not classified as an academic journal.

Ninasf (talk) 13:05, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other article[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result was do not merge into Mother Earth (magazine). -- DarkCrow^Caw 16:29, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be merged with Mother Earth (magazine), preferably at that title ("journal" is generally reserved for academic journals). Apparently there were two different articles with the name Mother Earth, but I see no reason why there could not be one article covering both. --Crusio (talk) 16:00, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There certainly is a degree of overlap; I've placed merge tags on the articles and will inform the anarchism task force. Skomorokh, barbarian 18:21, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree The two publications are from different time periods and were controlled by different people. From what I see there was no actual continuity between the two. The subject matter was similar and some of the articles in the later publication were reprints from the first series. That's about it.--TGC55 (talk) 14:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree along with TGC55. Two different magazines. The similarity of names may be because the second magazine hope to profit from the audience of the first. There's no *scholarly* reason to confuse the two, unless there's an expert to demonstrate that the second emerged from the first ... and can merge the two without throwing away any valuable contributions. E.g., you wouldn't merge "Amazing" and "Astounding" (both SF, very similar names, similar audiences ... but no).Twang (talk) 07:05, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That "(t)he subject matter was similar and some of the articles in the later publication were reprints from the first series" sounds rather like continuity to me, I must say... --Crusio (talk) 15:13, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with the merge proposal. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 05:01, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question to the two "Disagree" votes: how do you propose to solve this then? Having two articles, one called "Mother Earth (magazine)" and the other one called "Mother Earth (journal)" does not appear to be very clear to me. In addition, the "journal" version already mentions the "magazine" version quite prominently, so a merge really would not change that much. --Crusio (talk) 10:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.