Talk:Stuff (magazine)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Stuff (magazine) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Magazines Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

YouTube[edit]

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed, feel free to ask me on my talk page and I'll review it personally. Thanks. ---J.S (t|c) 17:56, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the YouTube links as it could be interpreted as copyright infringement. Especially as some of the videos are now available via the company's own site. However these had been placed on YouTube by the company under the user name stuffmagazine and the videos aren't a profitable source of income for the company as they would be if they had been recorded from a source (such as TV). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chapmanmania (talk • contribs)

Linking to the companies website is a better option. Much lower potential of copy-vio. ---J.S (t|c) 16:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Closing down[edit]

I just got the new U.S. issue in, and it said this is their last issue and they're returning to Maxim. I can't find anything on why they're closing though. We should definitely update this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PÆonU (talk • contribs) 23:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Got this too. "After eight years outside the mother ship, Stuff is returning from whence it came and will be henceforth be a part of the Maxim nation as a special section inside America's favorite men's magazine. Long ago, we were born from the loins of Maxim as a gear section and spun out into this crazy world, where we rocketed to success as the No. 2 men's lifestyle magainzei n the country. Well, like an old cowboy, we've defeated all of our foes, and now it's time to hang up our spurs and hit the hot tub. Lord knows we deserve it! So starting next month, in the November issue of Maxim, you'll find a veritable catalog of awesome: the hottest cars, the coolest watches and the dopest flatscreens, which will make you the envy of your friends. Simply pout, if it beeps or can crush a small woodland creature, you'll find out about it there. So enjoy this last issue, and don't cry for us --we're going to the world's greatest party. It's going to be intense. "

 Allholy1 19:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Laddie magazine[edit]

As far as I know, Stuff (like Maxim (magazine)) is a kind of magazine known as a laddie magazine. There should be some reference to this in here. In fact, laddie magazine should be created. --TedPavlic 22:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added a reference for the circulation figure.Enlightened Bystander 17:37, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First Edition?[edit]

Was the very first edition of Stuff, british or american? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.92.43.51 (talk) 11:36, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Currency formatting[edit]

I've restored the use of US dollars to the style proscribed by the WP:MOS that was reverted by IP editor 80.90.196.95 with the edit summary "Revert unhelpful edit. There are over 30 different $". Yes, there are also a number of countries using pounds, but we don't use GB£10 or GBP10 unless there is ambiguity – the same goes for $. In the one case, 2$ is not an appropriate format so I've restored it to $2 per WP:$: "Do not place a currency symbol after the value (e.g. 123$, 123£, 123€), unless the symbol is normally written as such". In the other case, from WP:$: "In non-country-specific articles such as Wealth, use US dollars ($123), euros (€123), or pounds sterling (£123)." and "When there are different currencies using the same symbol in an article, use the full abbreviation (e.g. US$ for the US dollar and A$ for the Australian dollar, rather than just $)". That situation doesn't apply in this article,so the full abbreviation isn't necessary. Please discuss if there are any questions. Mojoworker (talk) 17:23, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Stuff-july-2019-edition.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:52, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]