Imitators did not wait long. Nine days after the first _Observator_, L'Estrange's arch-enemy, Harry Care, changed to dialogue the _Popish Courant_ section of his _Weekly Pacquet of Advice from Rome_, relinquishing the expository format which he had followed since 1678. Later, after the Glorious Revolution, the popularity of L'Estrange's paper is evident in the spate of imitative "Observators" that ensued: _The English Spy: Or, the Critical Observator_ (1693); _The Poetical Observator_ (1702); Tutchin's _Observator_ (1702--a Whig organ) and Leslie's _Observator_ (1704--a Tory organ); _The Comicall Observator_ (1704); _The Observator Reviv'd_ (1707), and more. As late as 1716 there was created a _Weekly Observator_. By the turn of the century, the very term "Observator" had come to signify a controversy _in dialogue_.[6] Interestingly enough, even the typography of L'Estrange's _Observator_ may have left its mark on succeeding journals. A brief comparison of Interregnum newspapers (such as _Newes Out of Ireland_ in 1642, _The Scotch Mercury_ in 1643, _The Commonwealth Mercury_ in 1658) with John Dunton's _The Athenian Mercury_ (1693) and Charles Leslie's _Observator_ (1704) reveals a marked difference in typography. In the earlier papers the typography is generally uniform, with italics used for proper names and quotations, whereas L'Estrange's and Leslie's papers exhibit the whole range of typeface available to the seventeenth-century printer. Dissenter Dunton's _Athenian Mercury_, on the other hand, shows much less eccentricity in its typography, limiting itself to generous use of italics only, while Defoe's _Review_ goes back to the earlier restraint and presents a neat, uniform page. Whether these typographical differences are attributable to particular political views or merely to "schools" of printing is difficult to say.