Talk:Manicure/Archive 1

Merge of French Manicure.
The article French Manicure is written like WP:COI and really does not need to be a second article. In fact, very little of what that aricle contains would actually be worthwhile in this article. Just my view. --Lmcelhiney 18:18, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Speaking as a beauty therapist, I would agree. The actual procedure of the treatment is the same as a normal manicure, it's only the end painting technique which is different --Starrycupz 20:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Are there different types of manicures? The article on the French Manicure specifically gives information on what makes that variety special, while the article on Manicures just talks about them in general as a fashion statement to society and such. If anything, French Manicure should be a subsection of Manicure. 24.147.108.32 01:17, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Support - please merge these two articles as a subsection in the Manicure article. On a similar note, I have noticed that there is no "french pedicure" article or mention in the pedicure section and I could wonder about how to integrate it, perhaps as a mention from the manicure article or as a article redirect and mention in the pedicure section.--Kevin586 20:44, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The manicure market has been kept afloat by variations, the French manicure is now considered to be what is given to customers when they ask for a 'manicure' Vill (2006)

Support - The two articles should be merged, as the french manicure is simply a subset and does not contain enough information for a stand alone article. MegaMom (talk) 07:54, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Support - Most of the content in French Manicure are fillers anyway. --CecikierkHi

I got redirected here from "French Manicure", because I wanted to know how a French Manicure is different from a normal one. This article contains no such information. If French manicure previously existed and was merged into this, we should have retained a description of what such a manicure is. If we're not going to describe a "French Manicure" here, we should not have merged the articles and removed said information. I hear about "French Manicures" all the time so clearly, it is a common type of manicure. We should have a description of it here. 24.34.172.253 (talk) 04:38, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Footnotes/references
Footnote #2, rather than supporting that the French manicure is popular because of its clean, fresh appeal, links to an article that purports the style became popular in Britain because of its links with American pornography.Benami (talk) 19:18, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Azulene?
I'm familiar with azulene as a synthetic aromatic hydrocarbon famous for its blue color. Is it really used in paraffin baths? I would love a reference if so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.101.219.54 (talk) 08:45, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

So for anyone who was wondering, at least one salon uses the stuff. If you feel like using it as a citation, go for it. I just don't think it's really an appropriate link but it's the best I could come up with that wasn't ripped from the wording of the article itself. http://www.aoskinstudio.com/pages/add_on_treatments_to_your_chosen_facial Winston Spencer (talk)

No chip manicures
I think no-chip manicures are sufficiently different from the standard manicure to support a separate section. I've not been able to find much information about this process elsewhere on wikipedia (or the general internet for that matter). --Manicjedi (talk) 20:52, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Removal of link
I had added a link which was deleted (EDITED: removed website due to spam and link dropping from this spammer), but I believe the link has relevance due to the information contained therein in relation to the article. I protest its deletion and believe it should be added once again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TORR (talk • contribs) 00:53, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * See WP:LINKSTOAVOID. This site exists mainly to show ads and to try to get people to sign up for their newsletter. TORR has added links to beautyglimpse.com to several articles lately. 01:29, 5 December 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meters (talk • contribs) 01:29, December 5, 2014‎
 * Yes, this EXT shouldn't be added to any article, the promo editor needs to stop, and if repeated, it should be added to the blocked sites. Widefox ; talk 11:15, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

You're a spammer and I took the time a couple of weeks ago to go through all your Wikipedia edits to undo your spamming of that useless commercial site. That site has also been reported to Google @ http://www.google.com/contact/spamreport.html We do not tolerate spammers, so go away and leave Wikipedia alone. Cheers. (by ArthurJomasSmith on 10 December 2014_ — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArthurJomasSmith (talk • contribs) 13:31, 10 December 2014 (UTC) ArthurJomasSmith 13:11, 18 December 2014 (UTC) Minor edit to remove spammer's backlink thinking he can drop links in the Talk sectionArthurJomasSmith 13:11, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Rationale
Right now I am working on a technical (DTP) project dealing with a manicure set. As a man who almost never takes care of these, I looked up this article to pick up the industry terms. Still, I realized I am missing the "Rationale" section, that is why people care and pay so much for manicure: what are the benefits?

Does it cause feelings similar to ASMR? Or is it more social?

I guess it is a question to the fairer sex among us Wikipedians ;). Zezen (talk) 09:57, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Manicure. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141113113619/http://www.pncmtraders.com.my/page-9091.html to http://www.pncmtraders.com.my/page-9091.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:08, 9 December 2017 (UTC)