Talk:Wax play

message: I removed the huge information about melting points of wax and safety precautions.  Peter O. (Talk) 18:06, Sep 22, 2004 (UTC)
:Why did you do so? I've restored it. - Montréalais 23:56, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it is kinda scattershot and poorly written. I've tried to tighten it up a bit, but it reads like a very generic CYA disclaimer, making it sound like wax play is as dangerous as bungee jumping---which, honestly, it's not. A modicum of caution is enough to prevent all but the mildest of burns. Yes, you can splatter wax in your eyes, but it's not very likely. It's like having a notice at the trousers page declaring that "genitals may become entangled in zipper. always use caution when fastening pants". It's techincally right, but it's insulting. There's important safety information to be had, but including an inventory of possible unlikely disasters dilutes the import of the truly important information. grendel|khan 09:59, 2004 Dec 25 (UTC)
Hey dude, a notice like that on my jeans would help. because that kind of thing only happens to people when they aren't paying attention to their trouser zipping, so a reminder liek that would ensure that you were paying careful attention. just saying...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.244.123.223 (talk) 05:26, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Melting point of wax & safety

message: I have an article on my own wiki which is more extensive than the article here and which I think could be usefully linked to this one, perhaps as "further reading" or "see also". Could someone check it out?
It's at:
http://www.peter-masters.com/wiki/index.php/Wax_play
Thanks
Pmasters (talk) 06:01, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would alright to add as an external link, particularly since this article isn't facing a problem with too large of an external link section. Further reading sections are generally discouraged unless the source can be later expanded into the article which self published sources, while potentially informative, often cannot be referenced due to not meeting the criteria for WP:reliable sources. I'll go ahead and add an external link section for this though.AerobicFox (talk) 06:13, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested link to external article 

message: The article stated that 6°C difference in temperature equals 43°F, which is false. 6°C absolute temperature equals 43°F, but the article means temperature difference, which is in this case 11°F. That is, assuming the value given in Celsius is right (without citations, I can't be sure). I'll edit the page according to this assumption; if the original Fahrenheit value happens to be correct, the correct conversion to Celsius is 24°C. (Why do we keep using imperial units again?) Thermate (talk) 12:36, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sleazy converting between °C anf °F 

message: Wax is "quite toxic" because it comes from petroleum? Save it for the blog, please! Paraffin wax is the same molecule as the plastic tubs we use to store all kinds of food and medical supplies, albeit with a lower molecular weight. (It's polyethylene with a chain length of less than 50, I believe.) It could have serious impurities, but that claim requires evidence. Piojo (talk) 07:46, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  I removed the claims about carcinogenicity