The difference between a first serialization and a reprint 

The difference is that there's a difference.

It is as simple as anything to say that the relevant stories were published as first serializations in such and such a periodical on such and such a date. Badabing, badaboom, done. And that's how to put it accurately.

Specific words for specific rights mean specific things in any kind of intellectual property field.

In writing, if I have "first serialization" rights and I publish a "reprint" without owning the rights to "reprint" or having permission from the entity that does own the rights to "reprint," I'm up a creek.

If I, as an author, sell my story as "first serialization" rights to a magazine (customarily, it would be something more limited like first serialization rights for North America), then I retain all other kinds of "first" rights to my story.

The distinction wouldn't matter if we were talking about Wolfowitz's or someone else's personal blog where they referred to whatever as a "reprint." That would be oh, whatever, he didn't know the difference and just used the wrong word.

Contracts for stories or books are real specific about exactly what rights are going to be owned by who, and under what conditions and for how long. That specificity is why the terminology matters.

This is not Wolfowitz's personal blog. This is an encyclopedia. In a personal blog, the distinction between "first serialization" and "reprint" don't matter. In an encyclopedia, it does.