Talk:Eyelash extensions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Fashion (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

car lashes[edit]

removed vandalism referring to car lashes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.139.216.34 (talk) 20:07, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


lashologist Council of America[edit]

It seems that this information id from the lashologist Council and should be noted. Correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.139.216.34 (talk) 12:54, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

the "how to" section[edit]

Any opinions on whether or not it should be kept? If yes, then I can revise it so that it sounds less instructional, but it will still be unsourced and subject to removal at any time. - rairakku(talk to me) 20:57, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I've taken it out. how-to sections are not in keeping with our policies and guidelines. I've also simplified the writing somewhat and removed some hype. Really could do with some reliable sources that aren't simply advertising masquerading as advice and information. -- SiobhanHansa 17:55, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi

I am not sure if I am posting in the correct place but I have just had a link taken down from a page that it is relevent to. I amended the page so it was in keeping with the non promotional view and I was simply adding a link to a page which informed the reader more about the subject. The page in question is http://www.fakeeyelashes.co.uk/eyelash-extensions/

There is no promotion going on on this page and it is simply showing information, why is this a problem? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mobilebeautyuk (talkcontribs) 16:32, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Vague, Incorrect generalities, and Inconsistenecies[edit]

most people are ethical, buy from the same factory, you might need a license, etc etc. This article was at one time clear and concisely presented and now looks so thoroughly dumbed down, and poorly rewritten. The peopel that write tehse articles shoudl have some knowledge first.

File:Angsumalin siriphatthrasakmetha - 25 march 2011 - 007.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Icon Now Commons orange.svg An image used in this article, File:Angsumalin siriphatthrasakmetha - 25 march 2011 - 007.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests July 2011
What should I do?
A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:40, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Not to Wiki standards[edit]

This article reads like an opinion article. Latisse has not been shown to be unsafe. Iris color change has been noticed when the active ingredient is used as an eyedrop for glaucoma; it has *not* been shown to cause eye color change when applied externally. Either way, this article is in terrible format and needs to be either deleted or rewritten to remove bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.58.211.42 (talk) 06:44, 15 November 2012 (UTC)