Talk:Prevention (magazine)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Maybe a more generic article like woo in the media? Here's the TOW, btw--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:29, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sure, if you think that's better. Prevention happens to be the one I know because there are copies all over the house. Doctor Dark (talk) 02:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Uh, no. There's a reason media is its own category. "Woo in the media" would be a never-ending page. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- This just seems so specific, and there are probably a dozen other magazines just like this one that spread woo.--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:38, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- This idea of one page with many or many pages with one thing was what started my "herbs and spices" page, cause we had all these stubs. Maybe you could do a women's woo, peice. cause i sware every rag focused on adult women with kids is 50% diet woo, and 25% feel good about yourself and sex woo, and 25% "i need a day without the kids' woo.(ok, the last isn't woo, but still.)--En attendant Godot 02:39, 29 June 2011 (UTC)--En attendant Godot 02:39, 29 June 2011 (UTC) (ec)
- Women's woo is a good idea. I'm guessing it would be dominated by Oprah. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Oprah is so fucking guilty. She has a bullshit rapsheet longer than the tape measure used to find her circumference--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:43, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- and that damned "dr.oz" and teh dr phil guy. I diet, and use Sparks people to record my daily food/exercize, and EVERYONE on the chat type boards is all about this dr oz. since he is in favor of HGC, i can only surmize he is a freak of a quack of a woomeister.--En attendant Godot 02:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- My first thought is that "women's woo" sounds a little, well, sexist. But if people think it's OK then an article on this and similar mags along with Oprah et al. does seem like it would work. Doctor Dark (talk) 02:51, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Women's woo is the flip side of men's woo like PUA and bodybuilding woo/broscience. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:52, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Being one of those rare types (at least here at RW) that does indeed have boobs, i would agree that the title is bad "woman's woo", but the concept is right. now, how to be PC. --En attendant Godot 02:54, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Women's woo is the flip side of men's woo like PUA and bodybuilding woo/broscience. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:52, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- My first thought is that "women's woo" sounds a little, well, sexist. But if people think it's OK then an article on this and similar mags along with Oprah et al. does seem like it would work. Doctor Dark (talk) 02:51, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- and that damned "dr.oz" and teh dr phil guy. I diet, and use Sparks people to record my daily food/exercize, and EVERYONE on the chat type boards is all about this dr oz. since he is in favor of HGC, i can only surmize he is a freak of a quack of a woomeister.--En attendant Godot 02:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Oprah is so fucking guilty. She has a bullshit rapsheet longer than the tape measure used to find her circumference--User:Brxbrx/sig 02:43, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Women's woo is a good idea. I'm guessing it would be dominated by Oprah. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- Uh, no. There's a reason media is its own category. "Woo in the media" would be a never-ending page. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Woo for women? Also, Skepchick is a goldmine for this type of stuff. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 02:59, 29 June 2011 (UTC)