Talk:Axe (brand)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Expansion of History

I was motivated to find the reason why Axe was changed to Lynx for the UK and have expanded the history section to reflect my findings. This is my first edit so I expect I have made a few mistakes and I would like the verification of sources and the reliability of said sources. If there are any edits, I would like to hear from you and/or maybe question the sources that I've looked at. --Rubix41 23:59, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Flamethrower

Should there be a section or article, maybe an internet meme for the use of axe as a flamethrower? Its all over youtube, just search Axe and Fire. --152.163.100.5 16:10, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Um, no. It's not an Axe-exclusive feature. Any sprays with flammable propellants can be used that way. Prometheus-X303- 20:26, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Not for intimate use

It does say that on the side of my Axe "Phoenix" can...should I take a photo and post it (in the public domain, of course) or would that go under the "No original research" as far as getting that citation that's needed? --72.141.60.152 21:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I have a Lynx can (Phoenix) and it doesn't say "Not for intimate use". It must just be for Axe Cardboard boxA 11:53, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

This is due to the absurd litigiousness in the USA that leads to coffee being labelled "warning, contains hot liquid" and peanuts "warning, may contain nuts". In the rest of the world people are born with common sense.Gymnophoria (talk) 11:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Targeting

I added that it is mainly targeted to teens because it is. The actors in their commercials are all teens, and their brands are teen driven. Google statistics to see.

You're right and I doubt there are many people older than their teens that use Axe/Lynx (particularly in Europe) but the reasons you've just given are original research. - 81.178.209.89 11:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Criticism

Shouldnt there be a criticism section on this item.The company uses false advertising to get teens to empty a hole can on themselfs and expect to get a hand job.But seriously, it smells like strong shampoo, and is extremly flammable TaylorLTD 03:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes. This product is ruining children's minds! At least the advertisement. A ice-cream man driving at high speeds to go put suntan on a woman? A man who senses when two women are about to kiss each other? This is making America and every country that is exposed to this crap become highly promiscuous. Extra sexual perception? There's got to be people that have the same complaints as me. -Yancyfry

I think this is sarcasm but now a day's...you never know Towers84 09:42, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

They're not kidding. 152.23.196.129 07:25, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

It's true, I wear a can of the stuff on day's I actually want to get LESS blowjobs! Danno81 19:31, 8 October 2007 (GMT)

Need an article

about "the order of the serpentine." Viral marketing website. Gary Seven 19:59, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Tag

Did Axe make TAG? --daunrealist 02:43, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

No. Axe is a Unilever brand. Gillette makes TAG. "TAG is a re-incarnation of Right Guard Body Spray" PrometheusX303 22:44, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I made some further additions to the article. -L.a.z.

Merger

I'll merge Axe Bodyspray with this page; any objections? Dannycas 21:04, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Do it. Gary Seven 17:47, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

DO it. in fact why not just move lynx here and make lynx a redirect, there is nothing useful on axe that isn't in lynx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.15.155.53 (talk) 08:53, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Axe and music videos

Does anyone know if there's a hip-hop music video (possibly with Ciara) where there's a guy spraying Axe while walking down the street? I remember seeing something like that a while back on either MTV or BET, but I can't find any info on it now.

Yes, that was "1,2 step" you can add it if you want to.

History

The article has some contradictory information. In the introductory paragraph, it says it was first launched in France but later down in the history paragraph, it states that It was launched in South Africa, with a date prior to the France launch.

Axe/Lynx Ad

A practically identical ad was also made starring Ben Affleck for the Lynx label for the UK market. The ad uses some of the same scenes as the version with Nick Lachey, although most of the scenes are different. [1]

While, I'm not disputing that is airs overseas in Europe, but the link citing the ad shows Ben Affleck advertising the Axe brand, not Lynx. Can anyone from that region comfirm that there are two ads, or is this just a simple typo? -HumanZoom 05:26, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

And isn't it Lynx Click, not Clix? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.159.88.19 (talk • contribs).

It's both Axe and Lynx Clix depending on what region you purchase this item in (please see article for further information regarding Axe/Lynx). HumanZoom 07:56, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Its is Lynx Click here in the UK 86.16.153.191 (talk) 04:37, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

YouTube links

This article is one of thousands on Wikipedia that have a link to YouTube in it. Based on the External links policy, most of these should probably be removed. I'm putting this message here, on this talk page, to request the regular editors take a look at the link and make sure it doesn't violate policy. In short: 1. 99% of the time YouTube should not be used as a source. 2. We must not link to material that violates someones copyright. If you are not sure if the link on this article should be removed or you would like to help spread this message contact us on this page. Thanks, ---J.S (t|c) 03:22, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Lisa Snowdon

No mention of the infamous "lift" advert with Lisa Snowdon? I found this which might help. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 16:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

It's LYNX not AXE !

It's a brand originating from the UK, owned by a British/European conglomerate based in the UK. The article and pictures cleary do not represent this. The article should not even be called "Axe", it should be "Lynx", and all searches shoud redirect to "Lynx". I understand both brand names are used around the world, but Lynx should have priority for the reasons mentioned above. Sumit Desai 22:07, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

No, no it shouldn't I've only heard of Lynx on wikipedia so no. Dappled Sage 20:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Unilever is an Anglo-Dutch company (meaning originatin from the UK and the Netherlands). Lynx is used in the UK (one part of the company) and Axe is used in mainland Europe (the other part) so IMO it's more of a draw. Besides Axe deodorant gets more hits on google then Lynx deogorant. Anyway, its not like the first paragraph doesn't mention that this product is distributed around the world under two different names. -HumanZoom 01:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
If anything the page should be called Ego as that was it's original name and then have lynx and axe redirect to it. 81.129.166.156 20:42, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah Dappled Sage, you haven't heard of Lynx before so therefore it can't possibly be used as the name of the article seeing as Wikipedia should conform to your world view, right? Regardless of idiotic assumptions like this I think Axe is probably the most suitable term, for the reasons mentioned by HumanZoom (besides the obligatory Google hits argument that gets mentioned in every discussion like this); although Lynx wouldn't an unsuitable title either. Ultimately, it really doesn't matter much as long as both terms (and, to an extent, the original name "Ego") are explained in the opening paragraph. - 81.178.209.89 11:13, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
It's sold everywhere but the Commonwealth (and a numerical minority there) as Axe.24.6.2.72 05:15, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Guess it's how multinationals function. I bet most people haven't heard of Walkers, but instead heard of Frito-Lay. Samx 10:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm moving it to Axe (Lynx)... Lynx needs to be in the title some way.-- SalvoCalcio 14:43, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Move to AXE

As you can clearly see it's in all caps in the logo. Yonatan talk 23:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Move what to Axe? This article is located at Axe (deodorant) and currently Lynx (deodorant) redirects to the same article. Is that what you mean? Please see the discussion above and the first paragraph in the article for more information on why it is also called Lynx in other regions of the world. Thanks, HumanZoom 05:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
No, I mean move Axe (deodorant) to AXE (deodorant) as it is in all caps in the logo. Yonatan talk 13:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
Ah...sorry. Misunderstood what you were saying. I suppose we could if no one objects. I looked at Axe's official website to see how it was capitalized, but it was hard to get a bearing on what was the correct way since the entire site's text is done almost entirely in caps. Looking at Unilever's website, all the logos are in caps, but when they type about their product it is written as Axe. (http://www.unilever.com/ourbrands/personalcare/Axe.asp) Confusing... HumanZoom 15:11, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that's not how its done on wikipedia, folks. 203.97.127.101 (talk) 07:45, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Variants

I have reinstated the 'Variants' list as I believe that it is important to have one point on the internet that acts as a complete encyclopedia to the brand. It's a collective list that shows the extent & range of the brand across the globe & supports it's history. I-Primus (talk) 22:41, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I have started a chronology of variants from memory, as I agree that it is important to have a complete list of variants as they are such an integral part of the brand, but the simple list of alphabetised variants that existed previously was not helpful at all. Please can others fill in the missing years where known. Yorksaints (talk) 19:43, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

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 consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 00:54, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Axe (deodorant) → AXE or AXE (deodorant) — You only need to look at the bottles to see that it's all capitalized. Yonatan talk 12:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Survey

Add  # '''Support'''  or  # '''Oppose'''  on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~. Please remember that this is not a vote; comments must include reasons to carry weight.
  • oppose The WP:MOSTM clearly states that we should use proper formatting and capitalisation rules even if the trademark encourages special treatment. In this case it would mean that we use Axe and not AXE. --65.95.18.42 18:45, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose per MOSTM, unless "AXE" stands for something. TJ Spyke 23:46, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
If anything PEZ should be moved since it does not appear to be an accrimin. Just because one article does not follow guidelines is not a good reason for another article to. --67.68.154.253 02:02, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree with 67.68.154.235. But that is something you probably need to discuss on the Pez talk page...not here. HumanZoom 08:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
Quoting the PEZ article: "The name PEZ was derived from the German word for peppermint, Pfefferminz, the first PEZ flavour." While this statement could use a citation (I added the respective tag), the name appears to be at least some sort of acronym/abbreviation. I'd consider it a judgment call. - Cyrus XIII 15:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
PEZ now redirects to Pez. - Colinb007 (talk) 03:36, 22 January 2010 (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.

Americas

Shouldn't the part about Americas and Canada be edited?

In the Americas, Canada, India, South Asia and mainland Europe, this product is sold as Axe.

It says Americas and Canada, even though Canada is part of Americas. LostNecromancer 21:01, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll admit it probably isn't worded the best way. The US and Canada are both part of North America, but the author may have been trying to imply North, South, and Central America and got confused. I would change the article right now, but I'm not sure if Axe is sold in all those places. Can anyone confirm this information so we can re-write this part of the article? -HumanZoom 21:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Japanese Market Data Misleading

The article says that the Product Range was a failure in Japan and links to an "Internal Market report" but the report shows for Japan that 0 units were moved in 2005 and 2006 and that is all it says. How can it be a Market failure based on the lack of info in the report?Tsubasa (talk) 02:49, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed the sentence regarding this because of the lack of data in the report.Tsubasa (talk) 18:09, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Dark Temptation

shouldn't there be some mention of the new chocolate smelling one, dark temptation ?

BowChickaWahWah

The new ad thing, someone should write about it. http://axebcww.com/main.php?loc=us This is the website -Tim Broadwell

RGX

It says under competitors that RGX is made by Right Guard. It is made by Dial. Brandonrush 21:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result was merge from Lynx (deodorant) into Axe (Lynx). -- kollision (talk) 10:49, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Merge proposed with Lynx (deodorant) because it pointlessly splits the information on two things that are near-identical apart from the name. The large amount of cut-and-paste and similar structure support this merge.

IIRC, the Lynx article was split from this one. It should be merged back. (BTW, I live in the UK where we call it "Lynx", and I still think it's a stupid idea to have a separate "Lynx" article). 82.41.119.223 (talk) 16:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Merge I agree. Abtract (talk) 18:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge into this article. -- Al™ 07:01, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge I agree too. Yorksaints (talk) 10:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge I agree also. Colinb007 (talk) 8:23, 22 May 2008 (PST)
  • Merge I also support a merge of Lynx (deodorant) into Axe (Lynx). --Woodgreener (talk) 21:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • merge I support a merge of Lynx (deodorant) into Axe (Lynx) as well, as the Axe article appears more well written (in its current form.) Anyone have sales details of UK vs. US? I'd propose that the merge go the direction of the larger sales figures (i.e. brand recognition) with redirects as appropriate.Gnowor (talk) 01:25, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge I agree. The articles are very similarly written anyways. What is the point of having two articles with basically the same information? Remember to Be Bold! -- RandorXeus 16:21, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge I agree. Merge the two. I don't mind which name is used. I've lived in NZ and Australia. I've been using Lynx for 10 years and only heard of Axe on The Colbert Report tonight. 121.208.56.67 (talk) 10:30, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Merge You don't need to different articles on the same thing!--SUFC Boy 23:25, 31 January 2009 (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.

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 14:45, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Move back to Axe (deodorant)

The current name is to but it bluntly retarded, if you live outside UK,ect then having lynx in the title makes no sense and for all you know axe(lynx) could be a special type of lynx, if your from the UK,ect then having axe(lynx) still makes no sense as for all you know its still a special type of lynx. Axe(deodorant) with lynx(deodorant) as a redirect means that either reigon can find the page without problems. as im not registerd will somebody please do the sane thing and do this for me.--86.15.155.53 (talk) 09:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Why not Axe deodorant (Lynx) or something of that nature? Something that indicates that this article is about a body spray rather than a specialized tool or a species of feline? --128.237.243.196 (talk) 10:27, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Axe Proximity

For some reason, I did not see any information about Axe "Proximity". There are three different scents/fragrances, Amber, Vetyver, and Bergamot. I beleive these came out in 2008, but I may be wrong. I have tried the Bergamot and I find it to be a rather "pleasent" scent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.209.40.216 (talk) 03:17, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

That's true. I've seen those at my local grocery store. I think they did come out in 2008, but like you said, I may be wrong. Venku Tur'Mukan (talk) 23:24, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Neutral Point of View / Alleged Silliness

The "descriptions" of the scents seem rather advertisey or just plain silly. I think the descriptions should be limited to when they came out, and (if possible) a description of the scent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.129.56.82 (talk) 05:22, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

DISAGREE: I do not agree with you.
1. You (sorry, I can only address you as 'you' as you have posted anonymously) suggest the article is not neutral, but the article talks about good and bad sides of Axe, such as successes and failures, as well as controversy over deaths caused by the product
2. You refer to descriptions of 'scents' however the descriptions provided refer to the 'variants' and 'limited editions' which are more than merely scents
3. You complain descriptions are 'advertisey' [sic] and 'just plain silly', however anyone familiar with Axe knows that the brand is famous for its irreverent advertising and silly persona. I believe that a description of the variant that includes information such as advertising, pricing, packaging, product and description of scent are valuable additions to a page on Axe. Furthermore information in the description boxes is sourced from links on the internet about the brand.
Following your recommendation would lead to useful information about the (good and bad) history and evolution of the brand being removed and for that reason I oppose your suggestion. Yorksaints (talk) 13:28, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree and concur with the Yorksaints, disagree with OP. The issue raised by the OP is not an issue of neutrality whatsoever, or 'silliness'. The sparse and somewhat lacking descriptions are only because of that - because info has not been added yet. And these descriptions are written in a fairly objective way. And as for the OP's suggestion of changing the descriptions, also disagree - it is a fragrance - variants (limited editions, new ones, etc), their year of release and the scents are what its all about.
Notes also required at the moment to give advert information (in this respect I feel a NEW section on 'Advertising' would help a lot). Something as condensed as what the OP suggests would not contribute to the article. I have also taken the liberty of removing the (misleading) neutrality tag. Armuk (talk) 23:42, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Unreferenced Section Warning Box

There is a rather lazy and slap-dash use of 'unreferenced section' warning boxes on this article in the history section, although I am sure it is well-meant. If the person who put that up cared to click on the link to reference 1 they would see a comprehensive article on Axe from Business Week. Is it really necessary to reference every point made in a paragraph with the same article?

I will remove the warning box in about a week unless anyone makes a valid challenge.

Yorksaints (talk) 04:31, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Hardly constructive language, Yorksaints. I put the tags on because there was so much unreferenced commentary (you might prefer "lazy and slap-dash commentary") in the article. I have since stripped out a number of very poor references which were either non-reliable sources or simply did not support the accompanying statements. I did care to click on the Business Week article, and it did not, as far as I could see, support everything in the paragraph. The article now doesn't look great, as there are lots of 'citation needed' tags around, but if someone is able to find good sources for some of the material the article will be better for it. --hippo43 (talk) 05:27, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Discontinued dates

The product line table includes a "discontinued" column. I think Tempest being discontinued in the "early 3rd century" was almost certainly vandalism, but it looks like all the "possibly late 90s" and the more specific "2003" entries all came in on the [| same edit].

Are there any sources for the "discontinued" information? Heavy Joke (talk) 07:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I think a lot of these could be wrong.... For example, It says Marine was discontinued late 90's but here on eBay, you can see they are in the modern type of cans http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/LYNX-AXE-DEODORANT-150ml-MARINE-X-4_W0QQitemZ380151819197QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_HeathBeauty_BathShowCons_RL?hash=item5882d06bbd&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14 --Ortac (talk) 13:23, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

i was looking to see if i could get a tin of axe/lynx mirage but see it was dicontinued along with some old favourites like oriental...they were all great scents and i cant believe they have been dicontinued..is there anywere i can still buy products like this?...thanks 8/9/09 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.197.82.220 (talk) 16:37, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Interesting

Axe uses sex in their marketing. Dove (brand) soap uses a technique that tells women that they don't need to look sexy and they are beautyful.

Axe and Dove are both owned by Unilever. Brando26000 (talk) 20:37, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

List

I am considering removing the list. It can be argued that it falls under several aspects of WP:NOT including "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" and "advertising" (AXE page links here). It is also not sourced for the most part. Verification is a concern as well as the reliability of the sources (independent third party ones are preferred). Any objections?Cptnono (talk) 09:16, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I find this list very useful, so i think it should stay. 24.132.148.97 (talk) 21:00, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
I also find this list very useful, it lists all the AXE products history or almost it all, not mentioning the work it took everyone that made part of it. --T-oliveira (talk) 21:32, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Tawil?

The first sentence under "History" says: "Axe was launched in France in 1983 by tawil family Unilever." What does this mean? Tawil??? Paulburnett (talk) 17:33, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

No ideia either ! T-oliveira (talk) 18:43, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

2 fragrances not listed

I found some fragrances that are not listed, i don't know anymore info then the name.

  • Eclypse
  • Maniac

T-oliveira (talk) 18:43, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Idea of Product

explosm.com released in 01.08.2007 a comic about the whole chocolate thing. [2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.178.180.44 (talk) 01:15, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

International Please !

We need the release and discontinued dates to be not only UK but mostly international or at least europe/us. T-oliveira (talk) 01:53, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Conviction

the comments on conviction are VERY badly written, no? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.46.93.125 (talk) 22:40, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Flamethrower "High Alcohol Content"

Unless someone can prove to the contrary, i've removed the text referring to lynx being used as "flame throwers" due to its high alcohol content.

Any aerosol with a flammable propellant (like Butane) can be used in such a way. What's the most likely aerosol that teenagers have access to? Deodorant. 92.16.9.32 (talk) 18:36, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Lynx

it says its an english and dutch company and in these countries its lynx so the article should be called lynx not axe surely...? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.2.249.20 (talk) 13:39, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Who is this woman form lynx commercial?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DReAwqrWDls — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.12.91.242 (talk) 16:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Conflict on the name and page move proposal

Ok, this article has to establish a common name usage for consistency. We can't have Lynx and Axe being used all over the place.

There also appears to be a conflict with the naming of this article. Using the given citations for reference, this brand name was originally Axe when it was first released in France. Now...the initial release used "Axe", not "Lynx". The name "Lynx" is not used anywhere else except for the UK and South Africa (correct me if I'm wrong). In ALL other countries, it's known as "Axe". The name "Lynx" was only chosen for use in the UK because "Axe" was not available for trademark in the UK. That's the only reason why this brand even got the name "Lynx". I don't see why this article should be a special case and use a less-used form of a name when it's known as "Axe" everywhere else. If you see the version of this article for other languages, the article names use "Axe", not "Lynx". I see 15+ uses of the name "Axe" vs. 1 or 2 uses (UK and South Africa) of the name "Lynx". A Google search of "Axe deodorant" brings up 3,030,000 results vs. 937,000 results for "Lynx deodorant". The same occurs using the terms "body spray" and "shower gel": 2,080,000 vs. 146,000 and 1,070,000 vs. 343,000.

It seems to me that this article is not using the most common name. (page has been moved M0rphzone (talk) 06:39, 27 October 2012 (UTC)) See MOS:ENGVAR for the Wikipedia policies.

Then we have with the original creation guideline: this article was originally created with the name "Axe (deodorant)" and the other articles were merged into this one. There needs to be an established form one way or another. Comments appreciated - M0rphzone (talk) 03:16, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

New Axe Anarchy?

In 2012, Axe released Anarchy, the new line for both men and women. How come this hasn't been listed yet? 66.234.209.73 (talk) 05:00, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Timeline information

This article is pretty sketchy on when Unilever introduced Axe(Lynx) to North America. I found some detailed timeline information on Axe/Unilever's web site: http://www.unileverusa.com/brands-in-action/detail/AXE-/298199/

LegalTech (talk) 02:32, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Axe_(brand)/Archive_1&oldid=1136540970"