there were questions about the compilation process of the entries. They also wrote that they extensively used Who's Who themselves, and that any questions about the compilation process of the entries were not sufficient to actually stop them extensively using Who's Who themselves. Content Entries typically include full names, dates of birth, career details, club memberships, education, professional qualifications, publications, recreations and contact details. Utility Who's Who has been repeatedly described as useful and indispensable. Reliability and accuracy The Saturday Review wrote that Who's Who 1904 is "generally accurate". The World's Paper Trade Review wrote that "it may be relied on not only as being accurate but really authoritative". The Law Magazine and Review wrote that "The accuracy of the information given shows the great care with which this work has been compiled". The Law Journal wrote that the "biographical details of judges and leading members of the profession . . . so far as we have tested them, are . . . accurate". The Accountant's Magazine spoke of "the remarkable accuracy" of Who's Who, 1905. The Canada Lancet wrote that "The book contains a vast amount of reliable information regarding persons of note throughout the British Empire". The Law Journal wrote that the "biographical details of judges and leading lawyers . . . so far as we have tested them, are accurate". Engineering wrote that Who's Who, 1906 gave "accurate information regarding the career of men whose names are frequently before the public in an official or other capacity". Notes and Queries wrote that "For those engaged in literary and journalistic pursuits, Who's Who remains the most trustworthy . . . work of personal reference". The Library World wrote that "its accuracy is well maintained". The Congregationalist and Christian World wrote that Who's Who, 1907 "comes promptly to aid journalists and others who wish to consult . . . accurate biographies of the leading personages in the Western political and literary world, Britons of course predominating." The Standard called it "a monument of painstaking care". Page's Weekly wrote that "we have subjected Who's Who to several tests and are glad to find that the accuracy which pervades the subject matter is again worthy of high commendation". Medical Record wrote that "The data about Americans mentioned in the work appear to be in the main correct, though we notice that the name of the late Albert Bierstadt, the artist, is