Talk:Fenty Beauty

September 2017
Will this page ever be developed? Is it in someone's sandbox?-- miko mango  mwa!  23:51, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Adding info.
This page needs a lot more information and it would be greatly appreciated if someone who found more information could add some.

MarsLovesDogs (talk) 23:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Product Line Edit Request
In addition to the 6 products listed on the page, Fenty Beauty boosts a few other items like Match Stix, Blotting Powder, Blotting sheets, various makeup brushes, Lip gloss, etc. Can someone make a separate section for the product line, or perhaps expand the products listed? Thanks pineapple mango  mwa!  : pineapple mango mwa! 12:22, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Great question. Since this is an entry on a company, we definitely want to summarize the most important products they sell, focusing on those for which we have good references (reliable secondary sources that give context explaining why a given product is important; or review a product's advantages or disadvantages; etc.) At the same time, we also should be mindful of Wikipedia policies about WP:NOTDIRECTORY (i.e. Wikipedia isn't meant to give comprehensive lists of things simply because they exist--we definitely need sources explaining why the ones included have some significance) and WP:NOTPROMO, i.e. we need to take care the entry doesn't come off looking like an ad.
 * Anyway, if you have some ideas for text (+ references) you want to suggest, you could mention it here and we could discuss how to make sure it meets all the requirements? Innisfree987 (talk) 16:07, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Quote box
Hi, thanks for your contributions to the entry! Pinging as maybe you've noticed that I've removed the quote box for now, and wanted to explain my reasoning a bit more. I'm concerned that placing a large block of text from the line's own publicity so prominently will make the entry seem promotional rather than strictly an encyclopedic account--always tricky when writing about a brand currently for sale. Additionally, the entry has been accepted by DYK and is in the queue to go out to main page in three days, so the various editors and admin who signed off on it did so without seeing that feature, so I feel like we'd better err on the side of encyclopedic caution, even if I certainly admit the entry looks a lot less visually pleasing without it. At the information level, if you feel like there's anything the entry is missing by leaving out the quote box, is there perhaps a way we could use reliable secondary source to incorporate the info, rather than the primary and arguably promotional source? Thanks again so much for your help on the entry. Innisfree987 (talk) 20:05, 17 April 2018 (UTC)