Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 02:33, 21 January 2007

Re: Anal stretching article

I think the AfD speaks for itself. If you want to recreate a well-sourced relevant article on the topic there is nothing to stop you. If you want to try getting the old one undeleted, try deletion review. Cheers, Yomangani 10:05, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Response to AMA Request

Hello Rfwoolf, I'm Dfrg.msc (talk · contribs) and I'll be your advocate for your case: Misplaced Pages:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/December 2006/Rfwoolf.

Secondly, I see what you want to do, unfortunately I can't see what it looked like before and subsequently why it was deleted. However, what I could discern from the Deletion article was that:

• Read like a how-to guide
• It was unverifiable
• It was unsourced POV
• It was a howto and a place for dicdefs

Positively:

• Subject matter did not come into question
• "Legitimate concept that needs to be referenced"
• Could be referenced properly

I've no idea about these actions:

The user Guy (JzG) said the deletion was for valid reason, but that I am free to recreate the article so long as it is properly referenced, etc. So I begun to redo the article, but it was then promptly deleted by Guy (JzG) and locked from recreation!

But it doesn't matter. I have had previous dealings with JzG before. He is not unreasonable. I understand that you can't edit the article, but it shows promise. What I suggest you do is construct the article here or in a test page, and then upon completion take it to JzG. If it is decent article then I'm sure he will unlock the page so you can paste it in.

If you have any questions, just ask me at my talk page. Regards, Dfrg.msc 23:07, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The following is my response, as posted on Dfrg.msc's user talk page:

Re: AMA Re: Anal Stretching

Hi Dfrg.msc, thank-you for your response to my AMA issue, as posted on my talk page. Note for starters that the history of the Anal Stretching article has been made available thanks to my concerns, here: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Anal_stretching&action=history (you can find this link on the Deletion Review page in the Anal Stretching node)

Your suggestion about the article being locked for recreation, that I recreate the article on my usertalk page and then call Guy to review it, is rather problematic. Firstly, Misplaced Pages should be a collaborative effort, and it is unfair to ask me to rebuild an article from scratch all by myself, and, if you review the history of the article before it was up for deletion orginally, you will see that it was never that bad at all, in fact only 1 paragraph in the entire article could even be accused of being a how-to guide, and as for the bad referencing, I think it just needed to have a small referencing cleanup -- I was all for amendment as opposed to deletion.
Let me conclude with these two points and please let me know your response:

• Surely Guy's decision to lock the article from recreation is unfair -- I remain fully reasonable and don't think I abused the recreation process -- but if I did I was unawares. The article should be unlocked so that multiple users can try recreate the article, not just me. When the article was up for deletion debate, at least one user said that Anal Stretching seems like a legit concept that could be referenced properly, i.e. the article should exist, just properly.
• Aside from the recreation lock being unilateral and inappropriate, I would value your opinion -- looking at how the article looked before deletion -- on whether there was good grounds to delete the article to begin with. Maybe I am ignorant on deletion policy, but I currently insist the article just needed to be amended, not deleted, even if it was left as a stub. Deletion is a lazy solution to an article problem, and it seems that many admins are just amendment-lazy, and deletion-happy. It seems some admins may be offended by the subject matter of the article -- Guy is a significant christian -- and he made a comment to another admin that "he just wanted to see the article deleted". What do you think? Maybe you can help me understand why the article needed to be deleted instead of amended. There is even a wiki template that says "this article is being cleaned up to comply with deletion debate"

That said, I thank you for your input whenever you are ready.

I am in no mood to re-research an article that was nearly good before it was deleted. That's just stupid.
Rfwoolf 02:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll thank you for being highly professional about this. It will make the process run much more smoothly. You remind me of me when I first joined, I really wanted to give it to those deletion-happy or as I once said: "trigger-happy deletionists". And I didn't get very far. I learnt my first and hardest lesson: Misplaced Pages is not a democracy.

However, I have to agree with you. You raise valid points which deserve to be answered:

• Misplaced Pages is a collaberative effort and ideally, everyone should be able to edit it.
• I have viewed the article and although is was not perfect, it seemed decent enough (better by far, than most articles out there).
• Guy's decision to lock the article from recreation seems unfair, though talking to him may shed some light.
• I see no reason for the article not to exist (first though, it needs work).
• I'd hope that Guy's religion would not influence his decision, and I have confidence that it didn't.
• It does not matter that the article was deleted, it can be remade very easily. Just view the source and copy it into the new article.
• You'll find that there is no need to re-research the article, most all of it can be salvaged.

Also, with your permission I would like to get Guy involved in this.

Regards, Dfrg.msc 09:25, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

There is a response from guy at Misplaced Pages:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/December 2006/Rfwoolf Dfrg.msc 22:55, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

There is another response from guy at Misplaced Pages:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/December 2006/Rfwoolf. By the by, nice userpage. Dfrg.msc 09:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Proposal

I propose that:

• The article is recreated (using any means and material) in user space.
• Guy and my self will review the article, and make recommendations to the quality and correct content.
• Upon being approved the article is re-instated (with new article) and the page is unlocked.
• The case is closed.

Would this be acceptable to both parties? Dfrg.msc 08:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

And THIS is a how-to guide?

Welcome everyone, to the first exposé on the deletion-happy tendancies of admins. In this case the user Guy is very certain that the following reads like a how to guide and therefore was up for deletion instead of amendment. Instead, what you will see, is that only one paragraph could have been accused of that, and this was even debatable! The mind BOGGLES!.

Anal stretching is a practice used by some to train relaxation of the muscles of the anus, while others may simply derive some pleasure from the practice.

While some sources indicate that it has medical benefits, it is more commonly employed as training to more easily perform various forms of receptive anal sex. Users of these techniques include those involved in graphic pornography. The most common method of stretching is the use of butt plugs. This practice is often referred to as anal dilation or anal training.

The practice became well known on the Internet thanks to the shock site Goatse.cx, which had a picture of a man stretching his anus, before the shock site's domain name was closed by the Christmas Island Internet Authority in January 2004.

Care should be taken if attempting anal stretching because increasing the circumference of the sphincter muscle while decreasing its elasticity can lead to fecal incontinence. To minimize this risk, one must preserve the elasticity of the sphincter muscle. This is accomplished by proceeding very gradually - i.e. by inserting very small objects at first, and then over a period of months (or even years), very gradually increasing the size of objects that are inserted. Objects should also not be left in the anus for long periods of time as this will also decrease the elasticity of the sphincter. Any pain is a sign that one is proceeding incorrectly and should proceed more gradually.

"Rosebuds" are a temporary condition that can occur naturally after the anal opening has been relaxed and stretched in anal stretching. Larger rosebuds (medically termed a "prolapsed rectum") can be created by coaxing the rectum/colon out further.

Rfwoolf 05:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Stop now, please.

Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox, and use of user pages as such is forbidden. As is following other editors around to stir up trouble. Guy (Help!) 21:57, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

WP:SOAP (which you refer to) refers to the Encyclopedia articles thus:

" Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising. Therefore, Misplaced Pages articles are not ... "

Instead, the policy you refer to is WP:USER.

Take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/WP:USER#What_can_I_have_on_my_user_page.3F :

Another common use is to let people know about your activities on Misplaced Pages, and your opinions about Misplaced Pages. So you might include current plans, a journal of recent activities on Misplaced Pages, and your (constructive) opinions on how certain Misplaced Pages articles or policies should be changed.

--Do not be so self-righteous. If I raise an objection -- respond to that objection before you take harsh action such as protecting my userpage.

If for example you said

"I agree, you should be allow to give constructive criticism on wikipedia on your talk page, but that one reference to me (Guy) I object to"

then that would be different. But make no mistake, according to the wikipolicy that I can see, my post about Deletion Review is completely valid and allowed. Now -- just try see that from my point of view, okay? And respond to it as such -- not by imposing your admin-like powers on me, but by reason, talking, explaining, justifying, especially when my actions are fully supported by WP:USER.

Oh, and unprotect my userpage.

Rfwoolf 02:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)