The Five-Reader Problem

by Josh Piker It will, I suspect, come as no surprise to hear that the relationship between authors and those scholars who serve as readers for article manuscripts is an ambivalent one.  I try to recruit five readers’ reports for each essay that goes out for peer review.  A not insignificant part of my job consists of finding ways… Read More

Read More

“Coming Home”

Fissiparous.  Centrifugal.  Pluralization.  A-synthetic. Comes to find that when I blog about #vastearlyamerica, my inbox fills up with fifty-cent words. Each of those words captures potential consequences of the expansive nature of our field.  Fragmentation, dispersal, diversity, scale, incoherence.  I’ve been hearing a lot about these topics since “Getting Lost?” was posted a few months… Read More

Read More

5,000 more words

In today’s post, WMQ author Susanah Shaw Romney (April 2016) answers the following: “WMQ articles are capped at 10,000 words (plus notes). If you had 5,000 more words to play with, how would the article be different?” by Susanah Shaw Romney This article started out as a paper I submitted to the WMQ-EMSI Workshop on Women in Early America. The paper I wrote then… Read More

Read More
Daen_To Board & Nurse a Stranger_ALL

No Second Fiddle

In today’s post, WMQ author Miles P. Grier (January 2016) reflects on the editing process at the William and Mary Quarterly and how his background as a literary scholar affected that experience.   I ain’t gonna play no second fiddle / Cause I’m used to playing lead —Perry Bradford by Miles P. Grier In a 2008 Forum, published simultaneously in… Read More

Read More

#4ContentProviders

Tomorrow, April 13, Karin Wulf and a panel of experts in scholarly publishing will conduct a symposium at Columbia University to discuss major issues facing academic authors today. The event is open to the public and described below. You can also follow along (and/or join in) on Twitter by following #4ContentProviders. In the meantime, you may also want to read… Read More

Read More

Ginseng's stimulating effect

In today’s post, WMQ (January 2016) author Christopher Parsons reflects on how the editorial process he went through with the article pushed him to reframe his understanding of the key players in the story—including the leafy one. by Christopher Parsons I know more about ginseng than I ever thought that I would, and I suspect that many of my friends and family… Read More

Read More

Quarterly Math with Josh Piker

ICYMI: In the October 2015 issue of Uncommon Sense, Josh Piker brought us some special math. How does 122 + 462 + 462 = 18? Find out how the WMQ answers that question. My daughter, Naima, is twelve and I can no longer help her with her math homework. Yes, she’s that good at the subject; and, yes, I’m… Read More

Read More

"Finished" articles and life after publication

WMQ author Jeffers Lennox reflects on the life of his article “A Time and a Place” (July) post-publication. I was thrilled to learn that “A Time and a Place” had been accepted for publication by the WMQ, and, like most things I write, I haven’t read it since it went to press. I probably never will. It’s odd, but perhaps… Read More

Read More

Summertime Blues

by Josh Piker I’m frequently asked what it takes to publish in the William and Mary Quarterly, a subject that I’m happy to talk about, of course.  I’m especially happy to do so with graduate students and junior scholars.  But I find that I discuss strategies for having an article accepted in the Quarterly with the sense that I’m… Read More

Read More

What does it take? From Submission to Publication at the WMQ

One of the OI’s major goals for the next years is to articulate and share the scholarly values and practices that characterize the work of our community from conferences to publications. I talk with willing and unwilling audiences alike about the specific brand of intensive and collaborative editing practiced at the OI. I talk about our editors and our… Read More

Read More

Useful Peer Reviews

Two weeks ago, I challenged all of us to speed up the editorial process at the William and Mary Quarterly.  I noted my own efforts in this regard, and laid part of the problem at the feet of our readers —tireless volunteers that they are— and their understandable but deleterious habits of, first, not responding quickly to editors’ queries… Read More

Read More

The Pot and the Kettle

The Pot and the Kettle, or, What We Can All Do to Speed Up the Review Process by Josh Piker, Editor, WMQ One of my goals as Editor is to make the review process as smooth and speedy as possible.  The process isn’t always as smooth or speedy as any of us would like, and here’s a bit about… Read More

Read More

Recent Posts

June 29, 2025

Peer Review for the Born-Digital?


April 1, 2025

BJ Lillis


April 1, 2025

Patrick Barker

Subscribe to the Blog

[ninja_form id='48']