Jump to content

Talk:Chinese ideals of female beauty: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
SineBot (talk | contribs)
m Signing comment by 86.179.3.98 - "→‎A joke?: new section"
Line 13: Line 13:
Look honestly, I don't see how this is a valid article because it sounds like someone's opinion essay about today's society rather than a factual piece. I mean, if this article discussed more about how the Asian beauty sterotype means having perfect white skin and being skinny (with references, of course) then I'd understand. And maybe discussing the history of the female beauty ideal, such has how having bound feet were once a staple for Chinese women in society.[[User:SunsetFlare|SunsetFlare]] ([[User talk:SunsetFlare|talk]]) 11:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Look honestly, I don't see how this is a valid article because it sounds like someone's opinion essay about today's society rather than a factual piece. I mean, if this article discussed more about how the Asian beauty sterotype means having perfect white skin and being skinny (with references, of course) then I'd understand. And maybe discussing the history of the female beauty ideal, such has how having bound feet were once a staple for Chinese women in society.[[User:SunsetFlare|SunsetFlare]] ([[User talk:SunsetFlare|talk]]) 11:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
:Agreed, this article is in horrible shape. There's not really precedent for it either. While there is an article on [[physical attractiveness]], there is nothing on American ideals of beauty or Indian or even on ideals of female beauty in general. Much of what is here appears to be original research. [[User:Gobonobo|<font face="Verdana" color="333300">Gobonobo</font>]] [[User_talk:Gobonobo|<sup>T</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Gobonobo|<sup>C</sup>]] 05:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)
:Agreed, this article is in horrible shape. There's not really precedent for it either. While there is an article on [[physical attractiveness]], there is nothing on American ideals of beauty or Indian or even on ideals of female beauty in general. Much of what is here appears to be original research. [[User:Gobonobo|<font face="Verdana" color="333300">Gobonobo</font>]] [[User_talk:Gobonobo|<sup>T</sup>]] [[Special:Contributions/Gobonobo|<sup>C</sup>]] 05:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Just finished editing, I think the two different Chinese female images may help a lot to understand the essay


== A joke? ==
== A joke? ==

Revision as of 19:30, 3 August 2011

Hmm....

Look honestly, I don't see how this is a valid article because it sounds like someone's opinion essay about today's society rather than a factual piece. I mean, if this article discussed more about how the Asian beauty sterotype means having perfect white skin and being skinny (with references, of course) then I'd understand. And maybe discussing the history of the female beauty ideal, such has how having bound feet were once a staple for Chinese women in society.SunsetFlare (talk) 11:40, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, this article is in horrible shape. There's not really precedent for it either. While there is an article on physical attractiveness, there is nothing on American ideals of beauty or Indian or even on ideals of female beauty in general. Much of what is here appears to be original research. Gobonobo T C 05:49, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just finished editing, I think the two different Chinese female images may help a lot to understand the essay

A joke?

Presumably an article with this title was conceived after returning, drunk from a bar?

Its possible relevance to an encyclopaedia is hard to discern.

Unless... ... yes, perhaps expand the theme. Next could be

United States of America ideals of female beauty (1) plastic teeth with a radiation-white glow (2) plastic breasts more suited to ball games than human flesh (3) well-developed subcutaneous fat, steadily increasing with the years

At least as accurate, so perhaps deserving of a Wikipedia entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.3.98 (talk) 03:10, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]