Talk:Amateur press association

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Magazines (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

This article is particularly weak on history and on the transition to assembly art. It may also make sense to categorise the list of APAs under sub-headings. --Theo (Talk) 20:18, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Overdue promotion from stub to start on size.WP:PSA Twang (talk) 21:26, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

BAPA UK or British[edit]

I used the word "British" and the associated wiki link [[British]] to describe BAPA because it was founded with members from the island of Great Britain. Subsequently it attracted members from Northern Ireland, Ireland (Eire) and elsewhere but originally it was British. I plan to revert the wiki link change of United Kingdom back to British. --Theo (Talk) 19:35, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

On 21 Feb 2005 Rich Farmbrough wrote at User talk:TheoClarke

"By all means chagne the link, perhaps British Isles is a more accutate place to link to? The concept of "UK + Eire" isn't easily represented, but is significant in a lot of ways - perhaps there should be another article... Good luck choosing the link. Rich Farmbrough 10:21, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC) Having read your comment on BAPA discussion, perhaps you do mean United Kingdom (which excludes Ireland) after all. It does't seem salient that there were no Northern Irish in the originnal group. Rich Farmbrough 10:58, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)"

I have considered this further and I am now spiralling in wild indecision! Before getting too involved in this I feel that I should warn that my interest is largely intellectual: analytical pedantry rather than operational pedantry. The original central mailing address of BAPA was Welsh and all the other founder members were in England. So, the tightest geopolitical entity to which BAPA can be assigned is that fine legal demesne "England and Wales". But IIRC Phil Greenaway launched it as BAPA, the "British APA". Did he mean the British APA or the British Isles APA? I will mull on this. --Theo (Talk) 18:44, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)


Please be aware that the ANZAPA wikipedia page has been deleted following a XfD. It was not considered notable. I am pondering an appeal against this decision. I'll keep you posted. --Perry Middlemiss (talk) 23:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)


Much of the controversy over this is due to the ill-will by some prominent members of Ottawa Science Fiction Society against Farrell McGovern due to a number of indiscretions committed by Mr. McGovern while he was trying to survive being abused by his father. It may also comes from the fact that the convention Marc "The Starwolf" Gerin-Lajoie started, Maplecon, failed, while the convention that Mr. McGovern and Mr. Botte started survived named CAN-CON.

"Some claim that 'Plexy was spun off from TAPA by Farrell McGovern and there may be some minor truth in that statement, as there may have been a discussion between McGovern and The Starwolf, however, the start up work for the publication was done by The Starwolf."

I am sure that is a posting by Starwolf, as it has his typical "voice", and it's not from a logged-in Wikipedia contributer. Elisabeth, Starwolf, Farrell and other people who are obviously too close to the atmosphere and memories of the time should refrain from commenting on this subject.

Interpersonal politics should not enter Wikipedia entries, and I have updated the entry based upon that. 16:45, 28 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nhaflinger (talkcontribs)

  • Comment: I can live with that. farrellj (talk) 04:05, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment: I wish people who don't like what has been said would not try to sanitize Wikipedia by deleting contributions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:24, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
If it isn't verifiable from published reliable sources, it has no place here. That goes double for anything attacking a living person. That's not censorship, it's our established practice. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:53, 20 July 2011 (UTC)