Talk:New Left Review

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.

Socialism Low‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism 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.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics of the United Kingdom

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Circulation edit

Latest comment: 3 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

What's the number of its subscription, readership or circulation? Hermant patel 16:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Curious too. Only source I have is from 2004 (around 8,000 then): https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/if-circulation-is-low-have-a-row-just-ask-cristina-and-peter-how-749994.html Asoka89 (talk) 04:05, 10 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

What was the nature of the 1993 rift? edit

Latest comment: 15 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

If you're going to mention something like that, there's a need to explain what caused it and to give some idea of how deep it went. Just saying "there was a rift" really doesn't give us the information we need. Ken Burch 09:56, 18 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.174.72.196 (talk) Reply

More history/information needed edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I would like more information concerning the history of this publication---this wiki article is currently in serious need of more content. For instance, there should be a list of all past and current editors, as well as a list of long-time contributors (e.g. Tariq Ali). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.197.91.136 (talk) 05:22, 10 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Ranking edit

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The 2003 ranking in the lead paragraph is much better than the 2015 ranking near the bottom of the article. The order of this information should be reversed. The latest available ranking in the lead paragraph and its earlier better ranking somewhere in the main body. Surely? RobbieIanMorrison (talk) 14:15, 5 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

I went bold and removed the 2003 bit from the lede and contrasted the two rankings in the later section. Welcome to be adjusted further if you see fit. JesseRafe (talk) 15:32, 5 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Add topic