Talk:Baby oil
Add topic | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Spelling
[edit]"principle use" should be "principal use". 180.150.113.6 (talk) 13:59, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed, thanks. Commander Keane (talk) 01:51, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Paragraph contradicts itself
[edit]The section on mineral-oil baby-oil says
- Nevertheless, the use of mineral oil in cosmetics is being criticized. Natural-cosmetic companies claim that mineral oil causes skin occlusion. Conventional cosmetic manufacturers and dermatologists and cosmetic chemists argue against that, and studies have shown no statistical difference between paraffin oil and vegetable oils in skin penetration and skin occlusion. On the contrary, petrolatum-based preparations have been shown to be effective to the skin barrier function, even in premature infants.
Skin-occlusion is a moisture barrier at the skin. How can the effectiveness of petroleum baby-oil in "the skin barrier function" be "contrary" to the claim that such oil "causes skin occlusion"?
It's unlikely that I'll promptly notice replies to this comment; but maybe someone who cares more about baby oil will fix the contradiction.
Sean Combs
[edit]The topic of baby oil came up frequently with the recent Sean “Diddy” Combs case. I wholeheartedly agree that it was right to lock this page after it was vandalized by various unregistered users. Yet, at the same time the topic of baby oil has been discussed in relation to Mr Combs and his parties. I do find myself wondering if perhaps it should be mentioned in this article under a “Sean Combs Controversy” section as it’s use by him has become part of the history of this product and it may be relevant. I can kind of see arguments for having a section mentioning this controversy yet I can also see the argument against including this. I also find myself wondering that if this is included in here in a properly worded manor then perhaps this page would not face the kinds of vandalism it has faced. Anyway, I just wanted to introduce this thought and see what everyone thinks. NevadaExpert (talk) 16:54, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
- @NevadaExpert a Diddy subsection is definitely needed in "Usage". The association between Diddy and baby oil has become infamous in popular culture ~2025-39613-72 (talk) 15:52, 9 December 2025 (UTC)
- Added it, let me know if it needs to be edited Targets (talk) 23:10, 11 March 2026 (UTC)