Talk:Gillette
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gillette article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III.
|
That's an awesome brand in my experience — Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.30.38.102 (talk) 19:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Pubic Hair Controversy in TV Advertising
[edit]Are there any notable sources that would allow this to be added to the current article. I just started seeing these advertisements where a woman was shaving her pubic hair using Venus on television and they are not appropriate for daytime TV. They are explicit and I'm sure I'm not the only one 2601:642:4400:9F00:9C67:3EFA:A717:7C47 (talk) 01:33, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
- Well, I agree that pushing young women to shave their body hair to fit in with this prude conservative body normativity is worng--is that what you meant? And are you in the US? Because in 25 years in the US I have not yet seen an explicit advertisement. Are you saying that the vulva was in plain sight? Drmies (talk) 01:37, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
- You mean this one? This one is kind of like a manual. This one is the most recent--but it's hardly explicit, given that it's like a cartoon--though the springer characters are kind of funny. Drmies (talk) 01:42, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
- It could be paired with the new women's hygiene product ads that use pink coloured analog for bodily fluids instead of blue, making it look very much like the blood it is depicting. Advertisers have no shame. But if you try and introduce a discussino of it into WP you will get slapped for "unreliable sources".2604:3D09:C77:4E00:F545:4DAD:891E:D166 (talk) 16:43, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
- And justifiably so. Any discussion of such a topic needs to be covered in reliable sources. Ads are not helpful if there is no discussion in reliable sources to be found. We don't engage in original research or synthesis of sources to form conclusions here. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:36, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Citation 161 linkrot (In science)
[edit]Whole section should maybe go, but the link currently being used as an archival backup point is bad. https://web.archive.org/web/20201027162852/https://www.wired.com/2011/12/st-3st-lasers/ appears to work still. 136.34.181.216 (talk) 04:15, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
Excellent brand, 10 on 10
[edit]It's do original. 119.30.38.102 (talk) 19:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
In popular culture
[edit]Warner Bros. and other cartoons sometimes riffed on Gillette's postwar ad slogan, "How are you fixed for blades?" Bugs Bunny asked a guillotine executioner that in Napoleon Bunny-Part. Bill S. (talk) 15:39, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
Gillette 105.0.2.88 (talk) 21:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- C-Class Brands articles
- Mid-importance Brands articles
- WikiProject Brands articles
- C-Class company articles
- Low-importance company articles
- WikiProject Companies articles
- C-Class home articles
- Unknown-importance home articles
- WikiProject Home Living articles
- C-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- C-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- C-Class Massachusetts articles
- Unknown-importance Massachusetts articles
- WikiProject Massachusetts articles
- C-Class Boston articles
- Unknown-importance Boston articles
- WikiProject Boston articles
- WikiProject United States articles
- Talk pages of subject pages with paid contributions