Talk:Klismaphilia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the doctor's mess. | |
| Stub | rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
Kellogg is associated with Special K, which has nothing to do with enemas
Didn't you see The Road To Wellville?
- I take it that the issue of whether Kellogg was a klysmaphiliac is the sole basis for the NPOV dispute header? If so, I'm going to remove it since it seems like a reasonable statement to make considering the details over on Kellogg's article. Bryan 01:22, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Support the article?
This article sounds a bit like original research. Can anyone back this information up? DDerby 05:17, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Squeek!
Ghneeck, glg, MLEH!*
- (translation for non-prudes: there's been too many prudes editing all the sexuality articles lately. Kellogg would be oh so proud of y'all.)
[edit] Stephen king the klismaphiliac?
where did you find out that stephen king was an enema fetishist?
- I was wondering the same. I can find no evidence to that anywhere. IINAG 14:21, August 31 2005
- Any evidence on the other two, Marilyn Monroe and Mae West? Kent Wang 05:53, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Disputed tag
I have no problem with the article as such Paraphilias and Klismaphilia (has b/w drawings). The problem is with Kellogg, Marilyn Monroe, Mae West, Stephen King, Bill O'Reilly and some of the claims in the 4th and 5th paragraphs. CambridgeBayWeather 05:36, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
- Kellogg seems to be a clear-cut case, judging by what is known of his life and works. The descriptions of the rest are, absent of any evidence, simply nonsense. -- Karada 07:51, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
-
- Still need specific quotes for someone saying that "many modern commentators" share the view, but without any references about that specifically. Ansell 12:57, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Cleanup
This article seems to have become a drivel magnet. It needs a complete rewrite, with proper references added. I've started the process by removing the whole, extremely dubious, middle section of the article. -- Karada 07:51, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- I've now added a small bibliography, and a cite of a paper with an online abstract: does anyone have a pointer to the Denko papers? -- Karada 08:06, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] bad reference
The enema.org or whatever reference not only isn't a proper reliable reference, it doesn't actually say what it is tagged to say: that most enema fans are heterosexual. Lotusduck 21:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
