Antje says the following, which is a general reminder that we'll want to update/re-post all of the reviews before we publish the next batch of correspondence:
Just a note about an erratum that will need to get addressed before we launch more letters:
Source Text: Anonymous, "An Unfortunate Heroine," New York Times Book Review 50 (January 15, 1900): 931.
You already corrected this last May in our Github file to the correct title (New York Times Saturday Review of Books and Art) and date (December 15, 1900), but in the published version, it's still wrong. Given that it's linked in a note, n.lit00124, to ccda.corr01487, I think it'll be important to get this updated sooner rather than later?
Antje says the following, which is a general reminder that we'll want to update/re-post all of the reviews before we publish the next batch of correspondence:
Just a note about an erratum that will need to get addressed before we launch more letters:
https://chesnuttarchive.org/item/ccda.rev00145 as it still appears on our site is:
Source Text: Anonymous, "An Unfortunate Heroine," New York Times Book Review 50 (January 15, 1900): 931.
You already corrected this last May in our Github file to the correct title (New York Times Saturday Review of Books and Art) and date (December 15, 1900), but in the published version, it's still wrong. Given that it's linked in a note, n.lit00124, to ccda.corr01487, I think it'll be important to get this updated sooner rather than later?