Talk:Just for Men

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

I have no association with Just for Men, so I am not advertising it. Furthermore, I would suspect that nearly every household in America has an individual who knows what Just for Men is. It's sold in Wal-Mart (attesting to its notability). Unfortunately, a Yahoo! search for "Just for Men" was unproductive, as the over 2 million hits obviously aren't all related to this product. But certainly a speedy deletion has to be way out of line in this case. Chicken Wing 18:32, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More info please[edit]

What's the dye used? How does it work - does it build up gradually amd the color deepen if you use it more often? Could you just mix some with your normal shampoo? If you suddenly stop using it, is it obvious? Is the dye safe? 80.2.206.23 (talk) 19:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some information on ingredients, availability, and customer reviews. For the record, I have no connection with the product or the stores that sell it, and I am not a customer. However, it is heavily advertised and certainly notable. The Wired article provides information on active ingredients, but I did not find other articles with further details. The WP article already includes a link to the manufacturer's official site, which includes directions and lists additional ingredients that (according to the manufacturer) may be healthy for the hair. Customer reviews indicate varying experience, but are mostly favorable. It would be good to see a systematic comparison between this product and salon dyes, from an independent reliable source, but so far the Wired article and customer reviews are the closest I've found.TVC 15 (talk) 10:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at customer reviews, it seems like the company changed ingredients between 2006 and 2007. The linked reviews on follica.com are along the lines of, 'this product used to be the best, now the package looks different and the product causes burns and allergic reactions.' I don't know if there is a public statement from the company about the change, but it would be worth adding. Evidently, a product that might be 'new and improved' for some can be much worse for others.TVC 15 (talk) 20:32, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
To call the reviews "mixed" is tautological and misleading. Quite a few reviews are downright vitriolic and justifiably so. Accusations of causing chemical burns are serious; they should be mentioned and the manufacturer's response, if any. Asat (talk) 04:23, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Quite right that many reviews (and my own experience) are very negative. I've added sourced detail about allergic reactions and alternatives to meet these concerns. cwmacdougall 18:32, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's a semi-permanent dye, similar to others except that it has a very short set time (5m) and very convenient packaging, especially for facial hair (which is also a thicker formula).
The facial hair products are sold in only one size, relatively small amount of product (considering how often men would be likely to use such a product), and the company is resistant to packaging in more environment-friendly sizes.
The facial hair product in particular is also used by women for spot-retouching.
Drsruli (talk) 23:05, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Editorialising[edit]

There was quite excessive emphasis on repeating the content of the adverts, or discussing them in the style of a magazine article. I've partly amended this, but as with many Wiki entries on products, content from advertisers and manufactureres can sometimes be inappropriate, so please take care on this front.Marty jar (talk) 20:46, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Just for Men. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:47, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Serious reactions[edit]

"Meta analysis of several individual studies has suggested a linkage between some permanent hair dye products for men and an increased risk for leukemia." However, "Just for Men" is NOT a permanent hair dye product. (It's "semi-permanent".) (New formulation (apparently c. 2020) apparently even less permanent.) Drsruli (talk) 22:59, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Just_for_Men&oldid=1203152810"