|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
FHM was a good article, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Delisted version: October 24, 2005
- 1 Diaz?
- 2 2005 won by?
- 3 Why the comparisons with Playboy?
- 4 v. Ralph
- 5 FHM.com
- 6 Delisted GA
- 7 General confusion between different editions
- 8 Song by the Girls of FHM?
- 9 Too many pics
- 10 Why?
- 11 Nipples/areolae
- 12 FHM in other media
- 13 FHM UK - effect of Loaded
- 14 FHM article on Wikipedia
- 15 Cheryl Cole Vs. Megan Fox
- 16 Notes in the Sexiest Women list - relevant?
- 17 Pictures
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.
"rag" is a colloquial british term for a publication with no great value or merit, and "fap" is internet slang for what men tend to use issues of playboy for. lol. GavinZac 00:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
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.
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.
There are no references. slambo 10:43, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
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)
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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
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.
"Also, unlike pornographic magazines, genitalia and areolae are hidden by props, lingerie, or hands. Thus, FHM is typically stocked in the lifestyle rather than adult section on newsstands, although Wal-Mart banned lad's mags in 2003. Lately, the showing of nipples has crept into a few FHM photoshoots – possibly in response to a decline in sales."
I'm pretty sure you can't show nipples without showing areolae!
FHM never used to show fully naked breasts, but they sure do now.
I can't think how to edit this as I don't know precisely when nipples first appeared in FHM, so, could someone else have a go, before I make a hash of it?
--Stanleytheman 21:43, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
FHM in other media
"FHM is also an online gaming clan, "The Four Horsemen Clan". Found at http://fhmclan.com" Shouldn't that be elsewhere, or removed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 12:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
FHM UK - effect of Loaded
The article states that in the UK, FHM switched to a monthly format following the launch of Loaded. If my recollection is correct, then it had switched to a monthly format some time before Loaded appeared. Loaded prompted a change in the editorial content, with less focus on male celebrities, technology and fashion and more focus on scantily clad women.Danno uk (talk) 20:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
FHM article on Wikipedia
The Australian edition has an article about the reliability of WP. The article writer vandalises a number of articles and reports on how long it takes for the edits to be reverted. This should be noted somewhere - maybe at [Wikipedia:Press coverage 2009]]. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 03:22, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- Did they vandalise this article too? Way back in 2005 this article reached "Good article" status. As it stands the article makes too many assumptions the reader is already familiar with the subject and doesn't bother to explain the concept of a lads mag. The whole tone isn't very encyclopedic. There's a lot that could be done to improve the article even by comparing it to the old good version. If anyone has time to dig through the History you might find other bits that just need a bit of rephrasing or a quick citation to be worth reincluding in the article. Rather than vandalism I don't know why FHM haven't done a sneaky bit of astroturfing to improve the article. -- Horkana (talk) 00:29, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
Cheryl Cole Vs. Megan Fox
For some reason Cheryl Cole's two titles in 100 sexiest keep getting changed to Megan Fox. Let's clear this up: Each country has its own "100 sexiest list" The one listed in the artle is the UK one. This is notable for: a) being the original, b) running over 15 years, c) the press coverage it obtains.
Here is an arbitrary example, of the Philippines 100 sexiest list - http://www.fhm.com.ph/100sexiestwomen/
Australia's list: http://www.fhm.com.au/view_image.htm?index=99&gid=10570 - #1 is Miranda Kerr
The list at FHMonline.com, which lists Megan Fox, is just the US version of the list. Perhaps the US version could be added to the article in a separate section, or the title of the current listing be made clear it represents the UK version? Either way, the current list is the UK version which Megan Fox has not won, Cheryl Cole has, so please stop changing it. Spyka (talk) 08:27, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
Notes in the Sexiest Women list - relevant?
The notes in the table appear all to be trivial, and it's original research to imply that they are noteable (and others are not). I think the entire column should be deleted, or at least a reference be given. --KnightMove (talk) 20:00, 10 August 2013 (UTC)