Talk:Kali's teeth bracelet
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines. | ||
| Stub | This article has been rated as stub-class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Assessment comments
|
|||
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 1 April 2008. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Contents |
[edit] Response to AnonMoos
In response to AnonMoos's comments on my talk page:
1) There is nothing indicating that the person is part of a circle of inventors that created the device. Perhaps that should be added to the link making it more clearly relivant. -Neitherday (talk) 14:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- I don't know what the exact relationships were, but Mistress Infinity was heavily involved in, or very closely connected to, the Femina Society about ten years ago; and the Kali's teeth bracelet was originally invented and/or promoted by people who were also heavily involved in, or very closely connected to, the Femina Society about ten years ago. The Mistress Infinity web-page seems to be the nearest thing to an official statement by the people behind the creation of the Kali's teeth bracelet which is now still publicly accessible on the web (though it's not clear to me whether Mistress Infinity was directly involved in its creation). AnonMoos (talk) 15:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- Then it isn't clear how much her self-published geocity page is useful as a reference. Neitherday (talk) 15:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Whatever, dude -- I really don't care whether you call it a "source", "reference", "additional reading", "external link" or whatever -- however, the fact still remains that it's the closest thing to a statement by the original inventors of the Kali's teeth bracelet which is now publicly accessible. AnonMoos (talk) 01:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
-
2) If this is proposed as a source material, we should move it under a references heading, rather than external links. Make it clear that is the intent of the link.
3) It has to do with dominance, not necessarily female dominance. There is no reason this can't be used by male dominants.-Neitherday (talk) 14:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- It could be used by male dominants; however, in actuality it was created for the specific purpose of being used by female dominants in order to uphold the ideology of female supremacy associated with the Femina Society, as you could have ascertained for yourself with a little quick Google searching: http://www.tpe.com/~altarboy/ktbchrly.htm etc.) AnonMoos (talk) 15:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- How does a story you wrote prove the intent was only for female domination? Furthermore, this isn't an article on the Femina Society, this is an article on the Kali's Teeth Bracelet. Neitherday (talk) 15:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- What the hell are you talking about?? I didn't write that story -- it was written by Mistress Beclan of the Femina Society. This is an article about the Kali's teeth bracelet, and therefore the fact that the Kali's teeth bracelet was originally invented and promoted by individuals very closely connected to the Femina Society is quite relevant... AnonMoos (talk) 01:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Sorry. I saw "From: AnonEMoose" and assumed you were also the person who wrote it. My bad. However, a fiction story still is far from a source. Neitherday (talk) 02:06, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- However, it provides a context for the ideology and worldview in which the Kali's teeth bracelet was originally developed. With the Femina Society, there wasn't all that much difference between a non-fictional essay about how they would like the world to be in future vs. a fictional story depicting a fantasy of members working to establish that future. AnonMoos (talk) 02:15, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
Aside from that, I wonder how truly notable this device really is. What this article really needs is some references establishing its notability. -Neitherday (talk) 14:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- It seems to be fairly well-known among BDSM types interested in male chastity play (see the links from this search on just one site: [1]), though it would appear that only a relatively small number prefer it to other male chastity options for practical use. It's also of moderate interest to some for the role it played in the extreme matriarchal ideology of the Femina Society (and those who were influenced by it without perhaps being formal members)... AnonMoos (talk) 15:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
-
- There are only 30 sites found in that search. Looking for "Kali's Teeth" directly, I still found under 1000. Neither of those numbers indicates notability. Is there a reliable source that indicates this device is notable? Neitherday (talk) 15:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- Those aren't "30 sites"[sic]!! They're 30 pages on a single site (a site which has been the leading Chastity belt information website for ten years or more). I must say that I don't find myself impressed with way in which your overall approach to this article seems to involve rigid narrow interpretation of certain selective Wikipedia policies combined with a somewhat slipshod way of loudly stating dogmatic assertions and careless assumptions which are not backed up by facts. AnonMoos (talk) 01:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- 30 pages on one site then. It's still not very notable. Please stop with the personal attacks. they aren't helping the discussion. Neitherday (talk) 02:06, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I agree with AnonMoos. The KTB inevitably comes up wherever chastity is discussed. I think more people write fantasy stories about it than actually wear it, but that makes it no less notable. It's a notable concept. I also agree that AnonMoos did not make a "personal attack" on Neitherday, but rather an accurate assesment of his inconsistent approach.
- --63.25.228.109 (talk) 04:57, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
[edit] Don't delete
It's not the most widely-known thing in the world, but it does seem to be fairly well-known among BDSM types interested in male chastity play (though it would appear that only a relatively small number prefer it to other male chastity options for practical use). It's also of moderate interest to some for the role it plays in certain versions of extreme female-supremacist ideology. AnonMoos (talk) 02:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed. I had heard of this thing for years, wherever chastity or BDSM is discussed, it invariably comes up, if only in a fantasy context. --63.25.228.109 (talk) 04:58, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Notability
The notability template does not state this article in not notable, it simply notifies the editors of the article that notability must be established with third party references. Neitherday (talk) 02:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- Whatever, dude -- the fact that it surved an AFD undeleted is prima-facie evidence that notability concerns are not fatal for the Kali's teeth bracelet. Could you please just give it a rest of a few weeks before repeating what seems to have been rejected by the AFD result? AnonMoos (talk) 02:19, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
-
- It survived because some editors believed this was probably notable. That still has to be established with third party references. I'll leave the tag off for now, because I don't want to edit war with you. I'll be back in a few weeks per your request. -Neitherday (talk) 02:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Picture
If it might help anything, I made a little drawing of the KTB. It's a little crude, but it has the advantage of being guaranteed 100% free... AnonMoos (talk) 02:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
- I like it. Simple and the point, which is (IMHO) the best sort of image for most articles. -Neitherday (talk) 02:31, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
