On Filament voltages, the 3-500ZG and a wee bit of a snit!

[K1ZJH]

Very true Sue. I was an editor for two well-known magazines. Many publishers and editors have no technical
backgrounds. And as a practical matter few can afford to have degreed engineers on staff, and with the
decline in technical material being published it is understandable. I wish more magazines would develop
editorial boards to review material. Mistakes make the columnists, editors and publishers look bad, and
discredit the industry.

Pete K1ZJH

[K0BG]

Sue, I couldn't agree more. However.... A year ago, there was a very good article published about proper use of Anderson Power Pole connectors. I wrote a Hints & Kinks piece, and referenced the article. It took a year for it to get published. An article I wrote three years ago, took a year to get published. So it appears they have more articles than they can handle.

Tom mentioned above several times about the safety issues behind the article this thread is about. It would be great if the article was the only faux pas in that vain, but unfortunately, that's not the case. What's worse, and Tom touched on this too, retractions just don't appear even in letter's to the editor. That's another unfortunate occurrence.

[AF6LJ]

Sue, I couldn't agree more. However.... A year ago, there was a very good article published about proper use of Anderson Power Pole connectors. I wrote a Hints & Kinks piece, and referenced the article. It took a year for it to get published. An article I wrote three years ago, took a year to get published. So it appears they have more articles than they can handle.

Tom mentioned above several times about the safety issues behind the article this thread is about. It would be great if the article was the only faux pas in that vain, but unfortunately, that's not the case. What's worse, and Tom touched on this too, retractions just don't appear even in letter's to the editor. That's another unfortunate occurrence.

This article may be what is needed to force positive change.

EDIT...
It was only guess that they were starved for content based on this article being published without at least one run through the revision cycle.

[K1ZJH]

The columns in many magazines are edited up to five months before publication. In reality a one year wait isn't
that outrageous to reach print.

[WB2WIK]

The columns in many magazines are edited up to five months before publication. In reality a one year wait isn't
that outrageous to reach print.

That's just being slow or understaffed.

When I was writing a monthly column for CQ each column appeared in print about 45 days after it was submitted; the "June" column was submitted in April, etc.

Sometimes magazine editors go by a pretty strict editorial calendar, though, which allows them to choose a year or more in advance what types of articles will appear in each issue; June might be the "antenna issue," for example, so everything relating to antenna designs and reviews will appear only that month.

[W4PG]

Tom mentioned above several times about the safety issues behind the article this thread is about. It would be great if the article was the only faux pas in that vain, but unfortunately, that's not the case. What's worse, and Tom touched on this too, retractions just don't appear even in letter's to the editor. That's another unfortunate occurrence.

How does one "retract" an article already published? That sounds like trying to unring a bell. The standard in my field is to write a concise, to-the-point letter to the editor detailing in a few paragraphs the faults of the article and why it is wrong. I see that almost every month in every major medical journal (peer reviewed ones) I read. And the issues are no less important, as they affect the health of everyone.

The failure here was in the peer review process. I cast no stone as those responsible, but would like a better understanding of how it works at QST. Rather than "blame" them, I would strive to understand the process and locate the (in this case, very) weak link. The process almost might create a real discussion with those responsible of the peer review process and how to make it better.

Even though I also practice law, where everyone wants to "blame" someone else, true change and improvement only comes from a careful analysis of the process to locate the problem. Lawyers want to sue someone and "blame" someone for malpractice, for instance. I want to analyze what happened and learn how to prevent a re-occurrence. The airline industry has perfected (nearly) this process.

A few here are intimately familiar with the QST process. It would be nice to objectively analyze that process and without blame, suggest viable alternatives and improvements.

................Bob

[AF6LJ]

How does one "retract" an article already published? That sounds like trying to unring a bell. The standard in my field is to write a concise, to-the-point letter to the editor detailing in a few paragraphs the faults of the article and why it is wrong. I see that almost every month in every major medical journal (peer reviewed ones) I read. And the issues are no less important, as they affect the health of everyone.

The failure here was in the peer review process. I cast no stone as those responsible, but would like a better understanding of how it works at QST. Rather than "blame" them, I would strive to understand the process and locate the (in this case, very) weak link. The process almost might create a real discussion with those responsible of the peer review process and how to make it better.

Even though I also practice law, where everyone wants to "blame" someone else, true change and improvement only comes from a careful analysis of the process to locate the problem. Lawyers want to sue someone and "blame" someone for malpractice, for instance. I want to analyze what happened and learn how to prevent a re-occurrence. The airline industry has perfected (nearly) this process.

A few here are intimately familiar with the QST process. It would be nice to objectively analyze that process and without blame, suggest viable alternatives and improvements.

................Bob

There is a recognized process for printing "a retraction"
This can ether be done in the editorial section or in a separate article somewhere in the body of the publication.

A retraction usually contains the material that is deemed to be incorrect.
Retractions usually are brief.

If it were me; I would print the retraction in the editorial column, that would among other things show the league owns it's mistakes.

[K1ZJH]

Steve

I'm doing a monthly magazine column for a magazine under that banner. You have to remember that some magazine sales
are newsstand driven. Having the April issue coming on the stand a month or two early gives the impression that the
magazine material is "fresh." I just submitted my column for the February edition.

Pete

[N2CG]

Speaking of retraction, the ARRL should immediately remove from the QST Cover Plaque Award Poll voting choices "The Care and Feeding of a 3-500ZG Amplifier" by Charles Rankin, WA2HMM article.

[WB2WIK]

Steve

I'm doing a monthly magazine column for a magazine under that banner. You have to remember that some magazine sales
are newsstand driven. Having the April issue coming on the stand a month or two early gives the impression that the
magazine material is "fresh." I just submitted my column for the February edition.

Pete

No sweat, Pete. I did my column (VHF) back in the 80s. It got a bit too popular and I received 300+ pieces of mail every month, all "snail mail," since this was before the internet. That became quite a chore to open and read everything, and reply to so many people.

Today it would be easier!

I don't think I ever submitted anything more than 60 days in advance in four years.

73,

Steve WB2WIK