Talk:Perfect 10 (magazine)

Requested move (2008)

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no move. PeterSymonds (talk) 00:21, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Perfect 10 → Perfect 10 (magazine) — Perfect 10 can also mean the now defunct gymnastic score, hence the current page is proposed into a disambiguation page — Jay Pegg (talk) 15:53, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

• Support and other sports have perfect 10's as well. And some beauty contests. 70.55.86.69 (talk) 06:18, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
• Oppose. The only other article with a similar name is Perfect 10 (single) which is already correctly disambiguated by a hatnote. Station1 (talk) 18:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

• But I do feel that the score is notable enough to have its own page, as there is a huge article potential as well as a list for gymnasts who achieved a perfect 10. There are plenty of news and web source for it. The magazine may be more notable in the US than it was elsewhere (thats because my newsagent stopped selling them after a year), wheras the single is notable in Europe, which maked the pair equally notable but being used in the Olympics in the past, the score is far more notable, which anybody should no problem naming one gymnasts who achieved a 10.0. hence the reasoning for psge move is that the score have a higher notability to the two. Jay Pegg (talk) 04:03, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

• What you've described so far is a dictionary definition of the term, and articles that are nothing more than dict defs are not appropriate. If you feel an encyclopedic article is possible, then you could try creating something like Perfect 10 (score). If it survives, you can then propose turning Perfect 10 into a disambiguation page. But with no article and only a dictionary definition, there is nothing to disambiguate beyond what is accomplished with the hatnote. older ≠ wiser 12:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

• Oppose. The term 'Perfect 10' is already defined in List of gymnastics terms. It could also be appropriate to add a section about it to the article on the Code of Points which could include a list. I don't think it warrants an article because there isn't much more than can be said about it that isn't already covered in the ones that exist already.DanielEng (talk) 16:47, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

• Actually, I am more interested in a list of those who achieved that score, I proposed it as I thought I saw potential for an article, which would be used to introduce the list. Jay Pegg (talk) 16:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

It's not a rare enough score to be remarkable enough for an article list, in all honesty. Pretty much every top gymnast from 1980 to 1991ish received a 10 at some point. And, as mentioned, if a list was something one wanted to do, it could be added to the Code of Points article. At any rate, I don't think the creation of a list for a colloquial term that can be addressed elsewhere should trump a magazine that uses the term as its title.DanielEng (talk) 17:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

• I agree with DanielEng and Bkonrad's comments entirely. Knepflerle (talk) 21:57, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
• Forgetting the article proposal, I am going to stick to the article move idea as I have seen two way disambigation articles, in another words disambigation page that consists of two articles, my reasoning as stated earlier, the song and the magazine are as equally notable as each other. Jay Pegg (talk) 15:31, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Discussion

Any additional comments:

Is there an article for the gymnastics score? If not, then there is nothing to disambiguate. At most, a note on the magazine article indicating the gymnastics sense of the term should suffice. older ≠ wiser 17:01, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

few questions

This article is in category "Magazines established in 2007". Still it is told it was found 1997, not 2007.
And there reads: Perfect 10 was a quarterly men's magazine. Well, when was it discontinued? There is nothing about that in the article. 85.217.20.177 (talk) 08:52, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Perfect 10 is still around as a subscription website.

This article needed a bit of updating. Perfect ten may no longer be around as in a dead tree edition but it still exists in online-only subscription website. There was no mention of this in the intro or body of the article as I added it. The last print edition of the mag was Issue 43 - Summer 2007 but I was not able to find out when the subscription website went live based on a casual Google search. I assume it's been online since at least 2007, though it's unclear if they offered online subscriptions prior to 2007. --67.101.223.176 (talk) 20:39, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Images

It would be good if this article included an image, any image, for example first edition magazine cover[1] or any other notable cover, perhaps the Summer 1998 issue that was used in the film American Pie (visible in trailer https://www.amazon.com/American-Pie-Jason-Biggs/dp/B000I9VO0I at 2m11s) or any other image that might be considered notable enough to use a lower resolution version. -- 109.76.241.1 (talk) 20:27, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Requested Move - new discussion

Around ten years ago, this talk page was the subject of a discussion around whether or not the article name should be changed to "Perfect Ten (magazine)". I personally believe this discussion should be reopened as the magazine is effectively defunct and the album, "Perfect Ten" by American producer Mustard is what many people who visit this page will be attempting to access when they inadvertently end up here. I personally consider the aforementioned album to be more worthy of having the Wikipedia page title "Perfect Ten" instead. Thoughts? Sean Stephens (talk) 01:53, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Perfect 10 and Perfect Ten are different titles, so there's no reason the album shouldn't have that title. It doesn't directly affect this article, which already has a hatnote pointing to the dab page. I've redirected Perfect Ten to point to the album in the meantime. If no one objects, we can request a technical move to reverse that redirect at WP:RM/TR. Station1 (talk) 06:24, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 21 May 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved (technical move requested at WP:RMT) (non-admin closure) Lennart97 (talk) 16:46, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

---

• Perfect 10 → Perfect 10 (magazine)
• Perfect 10 (disambiguation) → Perfect 10

– This article is not primary per pageviews, the main title should be a disambiguation page as per WP:NOPRIMARY. 162 etc. (talk) 14:46, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• Pageviews here. 162 etc. (talk) 14:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

• Support - WP:NOPRIMARY. -- Netoholic @ 11:20, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
• Support – no primarytopic here. Dicklyon (talk) 17:56, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:18, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
• Support per nom. No clear primary topic for this term. Disambiguation page should be moved to basename. Paintspot Infez (talk) 22:30, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Uncited material in need of citations

I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:CS, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, WP:BLP, WP:NOR, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 04:27, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

LEAD SECTION

Perfect 10 featured up and coming fashion models and glamour models nude, a number of whom went on to become Playboy Playmates or Penthouse Pets, most notably Jodi Paterson and Erica Lookadoo (aka Juliet Cariaga, and Lexie Karlsen. It also featured former beauty pageant contestants, such as Miss Universe contestants Evelina Papantoniou and Leilani Dowding. Other notable Perfect 10 models included Erica Campbell, Katie Richmond, Veronika Zemanová, Marisa Miller, Tereza Benesova, and Ashley Degenford. Many Page 3 girls also appeared in the magazine's pages, including Michelle Marsh and Sophie Howard.

History

Before starting Perfect 10, he obtained a doctorate in operations research at the University of California, Berkeley and worked at IBM. To get noticed in an already saturated adult magazine market, Zada gave prominent display to his "$435,000 Perfect 10 Model Search" in which the model from the first year deemed most beautiful by a panel of celebrity judges would receive a $200,000 prize. $100,000 went to second place, and $50,000 to the third place models. The remaining $85,000 was split between the remaining seventeen finalists.

Ashley Degenford eventually won, and went on to land a role on the FX channel's The X Show. Monica Hansen came in second place and went on to do advertising work for The Gap Japan and to appear on the pages of Max, Maxim, and FHM. Marisa Miller, the third runner-up, went on to become a Victoria's Secret and Sports Illustrated swimsuit super model.

In 2007, Perfect 10 ceased publication of its print edition and switched to an exclusively subscription-based website. Issue 43, Summer 2007 was the last hardcopy magazine it published.