Talk:FHM: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:45, 26 December 2006

FHM was a good article, but it was removed from the list as it no longer met the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.
Review: No date specified. To provide a date use: {{DelistedGA|insert date in any format here}}.

cameron diaz has also been on the list every year

2005 won by?

According to the list and to the FHM site, Kelly Brook won the 2009 poll, not Angelina Jolie...

USA has its own top 100 13/08/05

why the comparisons with Playboy?

sure, FHM does carry at least 2 photoshoots with celebrity women every month, but they are accompanied by interviews which are lot more informative than your average fap-rag. FHM is the funniest monthly around, and its stories are excellent. My girlfriend reads the magazine almost religiously! Someone needs to re-write the description; i've added a small bit, but I'd write more if people agreed with me.

Picture

Is it possible to get a better picture for the 'Australian' section, Nikki Webster isn't the best example of Australian looks. just an idea

Sugested replacement (only Australian FHM cover I could find with an Australian on it through Google) - http://www.madmaxmovies.com/archives/magazines/images/Periodicals/FHM/March2002_Cover.JPG - will need shinking, this pic is 232.66 kB

v. Ralph

i read on the Ralph article that there is competition in australia between the two magazines. perhaps this information could also be included in this article.

FHM.com

Can someone add something about FHM.com? It seems strange that it's not on here when it's the biggest men's website in the whole of Europe and is infamous for things like 100 Greatest games, Bigeye on the web, 100 best websites etc.

Nudity

The article is innacurate in that it states that genitals and nipples are not shown. I can only speak for the UK edition, but nipples are frequently shown now.

Delisted GA

There are no references. slambo 10:43, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes there are. Pcb21| Pete 20:43, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

General confusion between different editions

I think several of the issues raised here, as well as confusion in the article and other related articles is due to the various national editions being casually treated as if they were a single magazine. The UK edition of FHM is not the same magazine as the US edition; nor are the Australian or Russian or Singaporean editions. We need to go through all the references to FHM and make it clear which FHM is being discussed. MK2 08:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Song by the Girls of FHM?

There was a song released in the UK in 2004 by "Girls of FHM" which was a cover of an old Rod Stewart song titled "Da Ya Think I'm Sexy?", it reached no. 10 in the UK Singles Chart. I was going to put it in somewhere but I wasn't sure where, can anybody help?

Too many pics

Honestly, the article doesn't need this many pics, even if we take seriously the lame excuse that "international covers should be shown." I'm going to be bold and remove some. It's hard to take WP seriously as a reference work when its contributions are so frequently slanted towards drooling men. (Not that Rachael Leigh Cook isn't drool-worthy. ;-) ) --Jay (Histrion) (talk • contribs) 18:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, since FHM started as a UK magazine, shouldn't there be a UK cover here? --Jay (Histrion) (talk • contribs) 18:15, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The covers I cut were restored. I'm not going to turn this into an edit war (although if people remain stubborn I might submit for an RfA). At the very least, though, I'm cutting the last pic -- we've already got the US edition represented in covers, and as it is the vertical column of covers is longer than the text in the article. --Jay (Histrion) (talk • contribs) 14:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are not the international covers all pretty much the same? Am I missing someting? Do we really need all of them? --Abu Badali 11:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

International covers are not terribly important other than places like the USA where such a huge influx in sales appeared (remember the USA is 250 million people, UK is 20 million I think). A few other more famous ones should be shown, that's it. Also FHMUK should have two covers - we've got issue one, perhaps a new one? Something from within the last year. I agree though, less internationals.

Hysterical - this person think the population of the UK is only 20 million. --SandyDancer 23:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(The Elfoid 14:13, 15 August 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I was bold and really cleaned up the clutter of images. --Zsinj^Talk 03:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HSH

Someone mention high street honeys

maybe even give it its own page

not many details needed as most of the winners have a page already (The Elfoid 23:11, 8 October 2006 (UTC))[reply]

WHY?

With regard to the following sentence, " Like similar magazines such as Maxim, its large quantity of surveys, humour, dramatic tales and informed reviews of everything from movies to remote controlled blimps has created a readership that ostensibly "read it for the articles"." It reads like the oft-satirised quote about Playboy, whereas FHM readers like myself, while appreciating the amount of lady flesh on show, DO actually enjoy the articles. If we wanted to see proper naked women there are plenty of alternative magazines for this purpose. The sentence also appears to contradict itself, speaking of "large quantities of surveys, humour, dramatic tales and informed reviews..." then belittling the readership for claiming to enjoy these very articles.