Talk:List of fetishes

message: As many, many people have noted, the name sucks, so i'm moving it to List of fetishes. I hope this is more agreeable with everyone.--HoneymaneHeghlu meH QaQ jajvam 03:33, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NAME CHANGE 

message: I've merged to articles today, but I'm not really sure I should merge some of the other articles; Although no one has replied to the message on the articles themselves, I think we should focus on merging just the stubs for now. 
If someone could please help rewrite these articles, I'm rather horrible at rewriting myself. Also, If you feel an article which I've put up but not merged should be merged, feel free to do so.--HoneymaneHeghlu meH QaQ jajvam 21:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging articles 

message: I've added the original research tag, a couple sources are cited, but it's not clear what they're meant to support, and quite a bit of this article's content appears to be personal knowledge. If the listed references really do support all of the content, inline citations might be a lot clearer. Seraphimblade Talk to me 09:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Original research

message: Taking deletion off the table, what about a merge with Sexual fetishism?  We seemed to have a decent showing on that one in the recent AFD debate, so it seems worth a mention.  SchuminWeb (Talk) 11:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging 

message: I'm merging and redirecting all the different garment fetish articles that cannot support their own articles into a "Garment fetishes" article. This will take a huge amount of work away from this list as half of the unsourced and/or original research fetish articles we have are garment related. Check out the (very, very) early build of the article in my sand box. My hope is that with some basic sourcing for the simple overarching concept of "Garment fetishs" established we can find a source or two for each different type.
As it stands now I'm hoping for two opr three sourced paragraphs in the intro and then one source for each entry. The thing is I'm going to need alot of help and everyone here seems interested in cleaning this section of wikipedia up. Please tell me your thoughts and if anyone is inclined to help that would be great! NeoFreak 17:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: IY's a good idea Neofreak, but I'm not sure how much help I can give.--HoneymaneHeghlu meH QaQ jajvam 12:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Not a bad idea.  It does, however, need a reorganization.  I'll play around in your sandbox and see what I can come up with... SchuminWeb (Talk) 14:00, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Feel free to tinker, as I said it's a very early build and I need all the help I can get. I'm worried that unless some sources are found for more brief mentions like the Jacket and Glove fetishes they won't be able to make the final cut. NeoFreak 14:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, in both of the cases that you mentioned, the problem is that the parent articles for those respective sections contain no references.  Fixing the parent articles, in my opinion, takes a higher priority than working on that, since one can provide instant references for the other (no rule about citing the same source twice!).  SchuminWeb (Talk) 15:38, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The minimal references to the List page doesn't seem fair to the articles that actually do have a good source of information. Why not leave them be and let them expand over time? Patience is sometimes needed in order to obtain a good article. Just because an article is small doesn't mean it won't expand over time. Premier Tom MayfairTalkF@H 20:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Being bold