Talk:Foundation (cosmetics)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2020 and 6 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ywrhea.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:43, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio reversion

This edit, although it looks very good, was reverted because it contains at least two copyvios:

Googling "A solution was found with the use of stick greasepaint," gives Britannica article (possibly more taken from them, I can't confirm as whole article isn't available).
Googling "In 1914 he invented 'Supreme Grease Paint" gives this (Not apparently quoted from Wikipedia in the first place, so not a circular ref to this article itself).

These may be the only two cases, but I'm not willing to risk it from someone who thinks it's fine to cut-and-paste whole sentences from other sources.

Fourohfour 12:14, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Mineral Makeup Company

This isn't a page to advertise. Please respect the massive contribution and research by the OP and leave adverts for message boards.--99.254.26.132 (talk) 19:19, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mineral Makeup Paragraph Mistakes

I'm an owner and formulator for a mineral makeup company. Very alarmed by the misinformation in the paragraph about mineral makeup: " The most common minerals used as the base are bismuth oxychloride, titanium dioxide or zinc oxide." (Mica needs to be included. It is much more common in mineral makeup formulations)

"it is important for the consumer to be aware that there are no standards or guidelines for labeling this product" (Wrong. Labeling is one of the MOST regulated areas by the FDA)

"Additionally, mineral make-up may or may not be USDA organic the label must specifically mention this, as it is possible to make a mineral product that does not meet USDA guidelines." (Cosmetics are regulated by the FDA, not the USDA. And minerals cannot be "organic" as that term applies to how a living thing (plant or animal) is raised. Minerals are from rocks. They will never be alive, thus can never be considered "organic". The term "natural" is most applicable. Also, the writer contradicts themselves by stating "organic" must be on the label, when they just stated there are no guidelines for labels!)

I will be further analyzing this page and updating it with accurate information. LorraineP (talk) 14:13, 7 April 2010 (UTC)Lorraine P[reply]

I find it offensive that you would add your estore as a reference.--99.231.199.18 (talk) 07:23, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Makeup that dissolves styrofoam?

I bought some styrofoam heads that you can mount wigs on. These things might also be known as mannequin heads.

I want to practice putting makeup on them.

The main page of this article would be improved if a paragraph or two were added to it describing the compatibility of some makeups to styrofoam. Which makeups melt styrofoam? Are there any that do?

Also, are there any institutes that issue certificates of mastery in the science of makeup application? Dexter Nextnumber (talk) 23:02, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Risks of older methods as motivation for R&D

Do we want a paragraph on the risks of older techniques? I saw on Michael Chiklis's page that his mistakes using greasepaint to prepare for an early role as a senior citizen permanently damaged his hair follicles at the age of 20, and therefore forced his acting career down a particular path. The notable source is given on that page as an NPR interview (and there maybe others.) It might be interesting if other famous cases could be located in history. TaoPhoenix (talk) 08:31, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I put a sample paragraph in, but someone reverted it. I can understand if someone didn't want a specific person mentioned, but I am surprised that the whole paragraph was deleted. TaoPhoenix (talk) 18:09, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh look. Now the Risks line has a Citation Needed. Y'all nuked my citation, so what can I do?TaoPhoenix (talk) 01:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it belongs in this article. Michael Chiklis does indeed claim the greasepaint caused his hair loss; but he gives no citation or reference for this assertion. He either guessed, or was told that was the cause and just believed it to be true, even though there is no evidence to support this has ever happened before. In this article http://www.belgraviacentre.com/blog/did-greasepaint-send-michael-chiklis-bald056/ a trichologist explains how unlikely it is that the makeup caused his baldness. If greasepaint could in fact cause permanent hair loss, millions of women around the world would be smearing it over their legs and arms. 99.232.40.188 (talk) 22:57, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion

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 redirect. --BDD (talk) 22:27, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have proposed the merger of Liquid foundation to Foundation (cosmetics), thoughts? Toasty (talk) 15:24, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support Liquid foundation reads like a how-to; see WP:NOTHOWTO. Existing coverage at Foundation (cosmetics) may be sufficient, and if not, there shouldn't be a great deal that needs to be merged in. --BDD (talk) 16:18, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to WP:BOLDly redirect it without merging anything. Editors should fee free to browse its history for any content they feel is worth mentioning here. --BDD (talk) 22:27, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.