Talk:List of art magazines

This article was nominated for deletion on August 29 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

Terminology

There does not appear to be a standard terminology used for the entries in this category. Some definitions say "magazine", some say "publication" and at least one says "journal". It seems to me that calling a high-end, limited edition publication with original works of art (like Minotaure) a "magazine" is misleading. Libraries used the common term "Periodical" to refer to all on-going publications. Perhaps that is something that should be considered here. Lexaxis7 (talk) 21:49, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough info here

It would be more useful to have initial dates of publication, publishing frequency, and number of issues. I was personally looking for a magazine with four issues that is NY based, being released annually. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jake13jake (talk • contribs) 19:29, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page is trash. What criteria is used to list magazines here (or not)? Most of the most famous (arguably best) journals are not listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.218.232.71 (talk) 07:30, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. With trash list comment. Also the magazine used in image is one of the worst. Always soliciting young artists to pay to be in it. I know, I'm a professional artist and teach at a prestigious London art school. This page needs a lot of work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:120B:C3F3:8DB0:60AD:3EDC:E1BB:BF8C (talk) 08:45, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A definition please?

This page would benefit from a definition and scope. The question is: What is an art magazine? -- Fplay 23:36, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, quite obviously a magazine that discusses the visual arts. --Jake13jake (talk) 19:23, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please Terminate Usage of the Term Art Magazine

ISSNs

Not a single ISSN is listed on this page. Wouldn't it be more appropriate to untag this page and tag the individual pages on publications that could have an ISSN listed but do not? --Keesiewonder ^talk 12:59, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Concur. Done. Dl2000 00:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaned up

I added a very poor definition and cleaned up the links--internal and external. Anyone want to re-alphabetise? Also, should we separate active publications from nonactive? 138.87.213.224 01:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I put back the notes, if they are removed it the list is no more than a duplicate of the category. Also they help to show which publications are no longer active. I think the only external links we need here are third-party references - if someone needs the magazine's website they can find it through the article itself. Kappa 02:42, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
By the way I removed almost all the redlinks with this edit: [1]. I'm sure some of them were valid but a lot were likely spam - if any reputable wikipedian knows which are which and wants to replace the legit ones it's ok with me. Kappa 02:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]