Talk:Buck (magazine)

CSD

The is no reason to delete this page. The page has not been created for promotional or commercial purposes. BUCK is a relatively new British magazine, that is the first in defining a new post-lad masculinity in the British men's magazine market. I have cited references throughout the article from credible sources - The Guardian, PR Week, LS:N Global/The Future Laboratory and Press Gazette. These are all edited publications that have written articles on the magazine. The Future Lab is a globally renowned trend forecaster.

I am shocked that the article should ever be flagged for review, considering articles on similar subjects - GQ for instance seems to have no academic worth other than a history of the publication. At least in this article there is discussion of sociological importance.

Perhaps it is because this is my first contribution to Wikipedia, and I have not followed some of the (rather difficult) formats. If this is the case then I apologise, and ask that you teach me to improve the article, but I stand by the article and its importance. If Wikipedia allows articles on other magazine titles, then surely there should be one on a magazine that is causing shockwaves to the British magazine market?

Looks to me like the text does assert enough independent coverage this time, however, it reads like an advertisement through and through, which needs to be fixed. The text should be neutral and wholly detached. Gwen Gale (talk) 20:19, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Blowdart has skived out the advertising copy and I've done some cleanup following that, making the article a stub, which I think is a helpful starting point for making this into an encyclopedia article. Magazine marketing jargon and peacock terms will be deleted if they show up again. All the references are still in a list at the bottom of the text. Gwen Gale (talk) 20:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I've gone a bit further and removed duplicate references, a reference that doesn't mention the magazine at all and a reference which has a £2500 subscription requirement in order to view it (but I left the quote that is claimed to come from it) --Blowdart | ^talk 10:43, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Buck (magazine). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090211042850/http://www.pressgazette.co.uk:80/story.asp?storycode=42293 to http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=42293

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:23, 26 January 2016 (UTC)