Between 1901 and 1910, ten annual editions of A & C Black's Who's Who were published.
Who's Who, 1901 The King of Illustrated Papers wrote in a review of Who's Who 1901 that "Much the same might be written of Who's Who, which has come to us in expanded form, owing to the incorporation with it of Men and Women of the Time, and the addition of many new biographies of Companions of Orders not previously inserted in this most useful book of reference. An attempt has been made in this volume for 1901 to record the relationships of people whose biographical notices are given, and we are promised that this feature will be extended in future editions. We may still find the same fault with Who's Who that we have always found - namely, that some people of importance are passed over with but a few lines of text, whereas many nobodies are treated with incongruous fulness - but the faults of the book are so few and merits so many that is hardly fair to mention even this trifling fault."A Few Books of Reference" in "Books and Books" (1901) 2 The King of Illustrated Papers 226 (16 February 1901) The Outlook wrote "To a newspaper office this reference-book" had "become really indispensable. The title is a little flippant, but the book, in substance, is a wonderfully full and accurate compilation of personal information.(1901) 67 The Outlook 324
Knowledge wrote "We suppose it will always pass the wit of man to set up a standard of distinction in the preparation of a work of this kind, but the continuous growth of a miscellaneous crowd of country J.P.'s, obscure M.P.'s, and still more obscure peers, will certainly necessitate some rule on the subject, or it may become a greater distinction to be out of the book than in it. Apart from this obvious danger to the utility of the work, it may be most heartily commended for its lucid and informing character throughout, and if it should happen that one wants to know anything about anyone at any time, then the information is most likely to be contained in Who's Who. But there is such a distressingly large number of names of whom it may be safely said that few people will ever have any occasion to consult their record, to become interested in their orderly progress from the University to the Bench, or excited concerning their recreations. Still Who's Who is a great work, grateful to the journalist, and comforting to those included in its pages."(1901) 24 Knowledge 42 (1 February 1901)
Golf Illustrated wrote "It would be idle to wish for a more accurate and comprehensive biographical directory of celebrities than the familiar red-covered Who's Who! It treats in a brief, clear, and satisfactory manner of all sorts and conditions of men and women, who, in the social, political, artistic, literary, scientific, and many other worlds, have the qualification of being either distinguished or interesting. There is, in addition, much useful information of a reference-dictionary nature such as one is constantly requiring to be primed on; and a carefully compiled index renders the task of consultation an easy one.""Three Books of Reference" (1901) 7 Golf Illustrated, 11 January 1901, p 32 American Ecclesiastical Review wrote that Who's Who 1901 "includes Men and Women of the Time, and is about a sixth larger than its predecessors. Its special features are the alphabetical arrangement of its tabular matter, making reference very easy; and the authoritative nature of its biographies, which are for the most part composed of the answers sent by the subject to a list of printed questions.
The disproportion between the careful volubility of the nobodies, and the reticence of many really great persons prevents the work from having any value as a means of comparative estimate, but it is a treasury of dates, lists of books written, battles fought, and discoveries made.""Books Received" (1901) 24 American Ecclesiastical Review 239 Engineering wrote "This valuable production grows steadily in size, . . . Our sympathies go out to the Editor as we turn over the pages, for evidently he receives very little information from some to whom he would naturally desire to give much space; while sometimes from less distinguished persons he gets ampler details than the case demands. On the whole, however, the biographies are satisfactorily written. The question, which is evidently addressed to each correspondent, as to what is his recreation, often does not get answered. However we notice that one confesses to a liking for loafing, which is frank. One says he has never collected anything; we imagine he has suffered from the crazes of other collectors."(1901) 71 Engineering 93 (18 January 1901) The Lancet wrote "the list of names headed, The Victoria Cross is incomplete.
No names are given of either privates or of non-commissioned officers, an omission which seems to us unfair.""Reviews and Notices of Books" (1901) 1 The Lancet 110 (12 January 1901) Carrington wrote "This indispensable book . . . becomes stouter and more important-looking as its years advance . . . In addition to biographies there is much other general information, which is brought down to October 31st last.""Notices by John T Carrington" Science-Gossip 340
Who's Who 1901 was also reviewed in The Spectator,(1900) 85 The Spectator 940 (22 December 1900) the monthly Book News,(1901) 19 Book News for March 442 The Builder80 The Builder 445 (4 May 1901) and The Pilot.2 The Pilot 821 (29 December 1900)
Who's Who, 1902 In a review of this edition, The Literary World wrote "It covers in the main the British Empire, while introducing some American names, and many belonging to the Far East" and that this dictionary of current biography was "invaluable" and that it was a reference book "which once known it will prove hard to do without"."First Looks at Some New Books" (1902) 33 The Literary World 25 (1 February 1902)
Who's Who 1902 was two hundred pages longer than the previous volume."Notes on Books, &c" (1902) 9 Notes and Queries (9th Series) 119 (8 February 1902)
Who's Who, 1902 was also reviewed in Public Opinion,32 Public Opinion 123 (25 January 1902) The Outlook,70 The Outlook 396 The Tablet,101 The Tablet 15 (3 January 1903) The Dial,(1902) 32 The Dial 131 The Lancet,"Reviews and Notices of Books" (1902) 1 The Lancet 383 (8 February 1902) and The Nation.(1902) 74 The Nation 92 (No 1909: 30 January 1902)
Who's Who, 1903 Part I, containing "the table of the Royal Family and the year's obituary", was four pages long. Part II was 1,528 pages long "with perhaps an average of twelve names on each".The Spectator 946. (No 3885: 13 December 1902) This constituted 1,532 pages overall and therefore Who's Who, 1903 contained more than 1,500 pages of biographies. "Who's Who" for 1903. The New York Times. 17 January 1903. p 40. Section T. p 8. 55 The Independent 158 The book includes more than 15,000 names."Reviews of Books, Etc" (1903) 75 The Bankers', Insurance Managers', and Agents' Magazine 119
In a review of this edition, The Magazine of Art wrote "The Art section is well served, especially in personages of the second rank, but more than five lines should have been accorded to Sir C. Purdon Clarke, when four times that amount is given to painters little known to the general public or even in the artistic circle."Reviews", 1 The Magazine of Art 260
Who's Who, 1903 was also reviewed in The Times,The Times. 5 January 1903. p 4. The School World,5 The School World 78 (February 1903) The Journal of Education,The Journal of Education, January 1903, p 78 The Surveyor and Municipal and County Engineer,23 Surveyor and Municipal and County Engineer 40 (9 January 1903) Notes and Queries,"Notes on Books, &c" (1902) 10 Notes and Queries (Ninth Series) 519 (27 December 1902) The Delineator,61 The Delineator 1085 The Medical Press and Circular,125 The Medical Press and Circular 727 (31 December 1902) The London Quarterly Review,99 The London Quarterly Review 411 (New Series, vol 9) The Sketch,40 The Sketch: A Journal of Art and Actuality 320 (17 December 1902) The Dial,34 The Dial 94 (1 February 1903) The Nation,76 The Nation 53 (15 January 1903) Navy and Army Illustrated,15 Navy and Army Illustrated 364 (20 December 1902) The Law Times,The Law Times 284 (24 January 1903) British Medical Journal, 2 British Medical Journal 1907 (20 December 1902) and The Tatler.6 The Tatler 448 (No 77: 17 December 1902)
Who's Who, 1904 The Saturday Review wrote that Who's Who 1904 is "generally accurate".(1903) 96 The Saturday Review 808 (26 December 1903) The World's Paper Trade Review wrote that "it may be relied on not only as being accurate but really authoritative"."Who's Who?" (1904) 41 World's Paper Trade Review 39 (19 February 1904) The Law Magazine and Review wrote that "The accuracy of the information given shows the great care with which this work has been compiled"."Some Works of Reference" in "Reviews" (1904) 29 Law Magazine and Review (Fifth Series) 383 (May 1904) 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"."Reviews" (1903) 38 The Law Journal 613 (12 December 1903)
Who's Who 1904 was also reviewed by Notes and Queries12 Notes and Queries (Ninth Series) 499 (19 December 1903) and The Educational Times."Miscellaneous" (1904) 57 The Educational Times 156 (1 March 1904).
Who's Who, 1905 The Accountant's Magazine spoke of "the remarkable accuracy" of Who's Who, 1905."Reviews" (1905) 9 The Accountant's Magazine 39 The Canada Lancet wrote that "The book contains a vast amount of reliable information regarding persons of note throughout the British Empire"."Who's Who 1905" (1905) 38 Canada Lancet 566 The Law Journal wrote that the "biographical details of judges and leading lawyers . . . so far as we have tested them, are accurate".(1904) 39 The Law Journal 665 (10 December 1904)
Who's Who 1905 was also reviewed by Notes and Queries2 Notes and Queries (Tenth Series) 520 (24 December 1904) and The Pharmaceutical Journal."Reviews and Notices of Books" (1904) 19 The Pharmaceutical Journal 879 (10 December 1904)
Who's Who, 1906 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"."Year-Books and Annuals" (1905) 80 Engineering 882 (29 December 1905) Notes and Queries wrote that "For those engaged in literary and journalistic pursuits, Who's Who remains the most trustworthy . . . work of personal reference"."Notes on Books &c" (1905) 4 Notes and Queries (Tenth Series) 540 (30 December 1905) The Library World wrote that "its accuracy is well maintained".(1906) 8 The Library World 247
Who's Who, 1906 was also reviewed in The Naturalist."Reviews and Book Notices" (1906) The Naturalist 56
Who's Who, 1907 Who's Who, 1907 includes more than 21,000 biographies."Works of Reference" (1907) 32 Law Magazine 256