Talk:Shaving

message: There is a good tutorial on wet shaving at:
Joy of Shaving A tutorial on wet shaving
For safety-razor shaving, see this .
Montereyham 02:15, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This site assumes one shave is enough and does not mention the direction razor strokes in the context of the direction of hair growth. I would not say it is a good one to cite. It has good pictures. I would rather Wikipedia develops its own set of pictures to illustrate shaving technique. Lumos3 15:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  not true - see step #4 where it talks about "shaving with the grain" - Also, at your suggestion I added mention that "Some men find that a second shave is required" --Lbeaumont 00:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, and more than that, it engages in direct retail sales-- a major no-no. -- Mwanner | Talk 16:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just to be clear, I get no revenue from the site. I began it about 10 years ago when it was difficult to find supliers for wet shaving supplies. I continue to link to useful suppliers. --Lbeaumont 00:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tutorial on wet shaving 

message: shaving makes hair grow back thicker
: urban legend. I just added some medical citations. Jokestress 17:14, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  urban legend or not? 

message: Is the sentence about pubic shaving becoming more common among gay men true, or is it just a stereotype? Is it supported by some study or survey? -- Mjwilco 23:09, 12 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stereotype? 

message: Whew...I'm combing through this article to fix a lot of grammatical errors and apparently irrelevant discussion.  I deleted the part about Alexander the Great, which seemed somewhat uninformative and rambling (Alexander was the King of Macedon, and I fail to see how that relates to a Roman emperor, especially over the trend of something as minor as shaving).  The sentence "Alexander the Great made shaving popular." seemed very unsupported.  All of my other changes are purely grammatical.
Hmmm. I wonder if they meant "Peter the Great". I recall from High School history that Peter would dry shave with any handy knife subjects who appeared in his court with a beard. Up until his reign shaving had not been typical in his culture. I won't put anything about this in the article myself because it is only a hazy memory from quite a few years ago, but I am quite confident that this was presented to me in that class. I do not feel authoritative on the matter. Perhaps someone else does.  Moleskiner 18:12, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: beards had been the style in russia, and peter the great brought western traditions, including cleanshavenness. Night Gyr 05:53, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, he was the big westernizer. The peasants were more or less ignored in this, but nobility was expected to learn French and ditch the notably "Eastern" beards. A modest "beard tax" was actually instituted to ensure this. Fearwig 02:20, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar, Alexander the Great 

message: Could someone source this? Am I supposed to believe that every person on Earth who shaved their hair in any way used two sea shells to pull it out? That's not even shaving, per se. Fearwig 02:17, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: the image and caption within trivia regarding the number of blades on a razor nearing infinity by 2015 doesn't seem relevant. And furthermore, is based off only five different razors. If anyone can find a better source that conveys the same message, then feel free to add/suggest. BadCRC 01:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  trivia image 

message: Let's not be silly about this. The photo doesn't really do a lot for the article, and the upload history is pretty conclusive.
I'm not leaping to the defence of the Dalai Lama picture either, but it's ever-so-lightly less OR than taking a photo of onesself for an article... Chris Cunningham 15:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not a picture of me. Sure I took it, with the intent of contributing to this article, but doesnt wikipedia encourage that sort of thing so that we can have copyright-free images? Personalcareposter 17:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  To an extent. There's obviously a degree of nuance in deciding which images are appropriate. The concept of being clean-shaven really doesn't need random illustrations. This one happened to stick out as being, well, just a random image, as opposed to a particularly useful illustration. Chris Cunningham 18:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vanity image 

message: Look, anyone can write a how-to article on a blog. Unless there's some real justification for these links having encyclopedic value, they shouldn't be included in this article. Merely being "useful" is not a criterion for inclusion. Chris Cunningham 09:54, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A book would be an excellent Reference to include. Also any links to web sites with "authority" such as those at established educational, academic, health , scientific  or government bodies. Lumos3 09:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blog tutorials, again 

message: I'm assuming that by Phizer the author meant the pharmaceutical company Pfizer and have altered it accordingly Wheatleya 15:25, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Pfizer

message: There's no article about this object yet, nor is it mentioned in this article. James Blond 13:55, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ladyshave

message: Under the picture in the section about electric shaving a brandname is mentioned. Think this is not necessary and maybe even against the W-rules. James Blond 03:55, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The display of razors image also names them by brand name. Would you also remove these? I think named models and classic designs are perfectly OK to name in image descritions.  Lumos3 08:07, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The razors image shows several products with several brandnames. This is quite different from mentioning just one brandname. Braun could ask a W-user, to remove the Philishave and replace it by a Braun model. Later on Philps could offer that user more, to put the image of their model back, and so on. So if brandnames have to be mentioned from the informational point of view, than rather several other names too, at the same time. James Blond 03:13, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Brandname

message: This article seems very oddly gendered. It seems to have been written originally from a male pov, with female shaving added in as an after thought, esp. in the section on techniques. Ex: facial hair is most often mentioned, although that is mostly a male concern. The writing just seems strangely unbalanced.
I agree. There should be a picture of a woman shaving her legs.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.62.30.106 (talk) 07:10, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gender disparity 

message: A man is called clean-shaven if he has had his beard totally removed.[1]
Reference notwithstanding, surely a man has to remove his beard and his moustache to be regarded as clean-shaven.
Unless anyone objects I intend to amend the article accordingly and remove the (presumed) innacurate reference.
Roy Badami 20:38, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of clean shaven 

message: Although I know personal experience can not be used as a source for the article, I am questioning the validity of the following statement:
"The primary disadvantage to electric shaving is (...). The advantages are as follows: (...), less pain and redness."
In my experience the opposite is true. Electric shaving is somewhat painful, even for a while after shaving, and sometimes gives me reddish skin, while 'wet shaving' has never given me any trouble at all.
I realise the statement is sourced, but the source does not provide any verifiable grounds for this statement (no research is cited), are there any other sources for this statement?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.81.122 (talk) 11:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Less pain and redness? 

message: Current multi-bladed cartridges claim to improve shaving and have seen a design war with manufacturers adding greater numbers of blades than competitors.
I had the same reaction to this comment as the poster above had to the one about electric shaving -- doesn't jibe with my experience.
First of all, if you want to get pedantic about it, the cartridges can't "claim" anything, because they're inaminate objects. Their makers may claim it, but if so, this should have a cite, and it might be worth mentioning that safety-razor devotees would strongly take issue with that statement, and would argue that the rationale behind multi-blade cartridges was entirely economic (it allowed Gillette et al to avoid commodification of razor blades and lock consumers in to far more expensive purchases.) I'm not saying that's the undisputed truth (although it is my belief), but the issue should at least be discussed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.239.191.220 (talk) 03:15, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multi-blade cartridges 

message: There's a call for a citation on the existance of a social stigma againsts female facial hair. I think this might be hard to find a citation for, as well as being non contraversial. Barring any arguments, I'm removing it. If anybody feels an overwhelming desire to see a citation, I'd love to hear why.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmsg (talk • contribs) 13:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fatuous use of "citation needed" 

message: I've heard that if you shave, more hair grows back, and it's stronger than before. Is that true? Wether it is or isn't, I think it should be mentioned. 62.128.42.30 (talk) 06:49, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: More hair?

message: I think an answer to that question would be a great addition to this article if someone knows or can find the answer. I also wonder if it is possible to have a blade that is too sharp so that you can't shave with it without getting cut on every stroke. Mindbuilder (talk) 23:18, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why don't sharp razors normally cut skin while shaving? 

message: seriously? 82.46.109.39 (talk) 12:42, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation needed for cartridges costing more money than single blades? what? 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 19 August 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:42, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Depilatory powder newspaper advertisement.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 19 August 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:42, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Advertisement for women's shaving razor 1933.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 13:24, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:BattleofIssus333BC-mosaic-detail1.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: The shaving in religion section on Christianity seems to deal with head, rather than beard shaving, except for the Amish.  However I'd like to raise two points:
1. Some adherents of Eastern Orthodoxy, or at least Russian Orthodoxy, consider beards a sign of piety.  I'm currently too busy/lazy to do the research and find out and source the reasoning.  Also, I'd want to do research on Oriental Orthodoxy at the same time.
2. I know that some evangelical colleges require students to shave, as does Brigham Young University.  These regulations usually seem to allow sideburns to some point on the ear and nothing else, as well as require close-cropped hair.  There are also some exceptions, for example students over 25 at Bob Jones University and religious (Sikh/Muslim/Jewish) at BYU.  Further modern Mormons (though not the polygamist church fathers) and evangelical preachers always seem to be bare-faced.  So my question is, what's the deal with hardcore Christians and shaving requirements?  Is there some textual basis?  Is it to distinguish adherents from heathen Jews and Muslims and heretic Eastern Orthodox?  Or is it just because Mormons and evangelicals like to promote themselves as the protectors of traditional Western culture, and shaving has been common among the upper classes in Western Culture at least since Roman times? —Quintucket (talk) 03:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shaving in Religion: Eastern Orthodoxy, Mormonism, and Evangelical Protestantism 

message: The first image in the article, captioned "A man shaving his neck using a straight razor", uses the standard TV and cinematic trick of having the person whose image we see in the mirror not actually looking at his own image in the mirror, but looking at the reflection of the camera. In other words, he is not actually using the mirror to help with his shaving.
So, it's a trick photo. Should we really be using it? HiLo48 (talk) 08:52, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  That first image is questionable 

message: I think it would help the article, and, more importantly, users, if someone could provide a comparison picture for the described unwanted effects of shaving (ie cuts vs razor burn vs razor bumps etc.). This would help clarify what is what, for users who are interested (as the descriptions are fairly similar). 46.239.250.137 (talk) 15:35, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion for improvement