As an auto historian of some tenure, I'd like to ask feature writers to ake sure of accurate info in 1:1 historical references -- really positive -- before committing them to print. Teddy Roosevelt said that the presidency was a 'bully pulpit' to preach from, and an article with historical 'facts' might be seen the same way; at least when some factoid is commited to print it tends to assume authority and may be cited or quoted to substantiate some point, right? I've seen some wonderfully researched and accurate data in SAE (and other model mags) and also some real gems of misinformation and hooey.
SAE writers, if the magazine deigns to set up as a historical resource, you must not propagate inaccurate or speculative statements as fact; 'urban legends', 'conventional wisdon (sic), or just hip-shootin' with information isn't so. No one expects an article in a journal concerned with toys -- which is what our scale models are, really-- to cite sources, list references, and so forth, but do run your historical factiods by someone who has the unimpeachable knowledge, at the very least. We owe it to our younger modelers not to feed them convivial hooey, don't we?
I hope no one sees this as a rant; however, when things are written in ink and distrubuted to hundreds of thousands of readers, statements had better be iron-clad confirmable. And yes, I've seen some really bad faux pas, mis-statements, and just plain silly information in even such authorities as AUTOMOBILE QUARTERLY, which is just sad.
Thx! Wick Humble [Modeling since early 'fifties]
Oh yes; I'm guilty also, and I apologize!!