Deletion of Hogtie bondage

Comment: and merge Hogtie into this longer article, or this one into the more specific title.  Then redirect the deleted article into the remaining article.  Why? Neither article is |well sourced, but as a concept they are |notable, although close enough to warrant a single article, and lots of |references must exist somewhere on The Internet or literature
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:N||WP:V)

Comment: Ok, I'm not saying it constitutes significant coverage, but google books suggests that there are books out there which do provide the kind of detail shown in the article - so I don't think its a case of , just a badly sourced but otherwise plausible article. See http://books.google.com/books?id=ZPP7NnFIPYoC&pg=PA98&dq=Hogtie+bondage&sig=cO7b0nPmuSDevpoA38PaczZeO6Y this for example, which alludes to the 'technique' whilst describing a different one. Ok, ew and stuff
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: into Bondage (BDSM) Fails  and  and seems to be bondage-cruft
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:NN)