User talk:Cburnett/Other

=January 14, 2007 archive start=

List of breweries
You reverted a version of this with redlinks that are simply incorrect - there were no redlinks in any of the sections that I changed to See Category entries - the categories are in all cases more comprehensive as well, and the lists were arbitrary and pointless. See discussion at Wikipedia_talk%3AWikiProject_Beer. Justinc 10:26, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * As you havent responded I have re-reverted your changes. Justinc 13:27, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * No, I missed your posting here. Why:
 * Red links are not Bad Things
 * A "List of ...." is not a page intended for linking to categories (that's what parent categories are for) and removing links to be replaced with links to categories undermines the entire purpose of listing them in the first place
 * I'm debating on VFD'ing the list and/or posting a merge with the other list that includes brands
 * Cburnett 19:48, Apr 25, 2005 (UTC)


 * There were not any red links on the parts I replaced with categories. Look at the history:

for example, which you have left with redlinks in. You reverted an earlier version with typos, incorrect names etc. I dont have anything against redlink lists, although I prefer them to be non-arbitrary lists. I only added categories to emphasise the total uselessness of the list in the first place, and also said I was keen on VfDing it. And I linked to where the discussion about this was going on, where it would be polite to respond, rather than re-re-reverting. Justinc 23:43, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Nigeria
 * China

King Arthur's Carrousel
I agree that something must be done about the King Arthur's Carrousel section. It is obviously a British or archaic spelling, which is throwing people off. I just want to keep the article looking good and not having little notes everywhere on everything that people might change, like the controversial amusement park/theme park categories, but I'll put a note on the page to remind people not to change it, because, apparently, people haven't been looking at the history for the article. --Evanwohrman 05:21, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Penis Banding Article
Dear Cburnett ,

I am a FemDomme active in the BDSM scene. I use Penis banding on my husband for many reasons. One it helps with our chastity play and second it makes it so he lasts longer when we do have sex. I know of several other Femdommes as well as several Doms in the local scene and nation wide that also use penis banding for many reasons. It has nothing to do with castration fantasies. Many men that wish it to be done do not want to loose their penis, just the problem of premature ejaculation and stamina problems. Is it a normal solution to a common problem? No, but it fits perfectly with our lifestyle.

I often used the penis banding article to send to potential submissives that were asking about it. It was easier than typing the same thing out over and over again and gave it a hint of authority since it was on Wikepedia. I’ve also sent it out to other FemDommes interested in the subject since it include some of the medical advice of length of time, proper technique etc.

I suggest that instead of immediately assuming that because you weren’t interested in it or understood it that you should vote on deleting it. The BDSM lifestyle is very complex and there is no right or wrong way about it. As long as everyone is consensual the best thing is to try and find the safest way about it. Instead try asking the person who wrote the page about it. Or ask someone else familiar with the practice. There were several edits to it so someone else had to be practicing it. It was definitely not to paraphrase you ‘a made up activity to get it on Wikepedia’. If you wish I’ll even send you pictures of the activity in question *winks*. I know of several late night prowlers that do it on webcams for fun. You can question them about it too.

As for show your show you some articles:

http://wiki.bmezine.com/index.php/Banding

http://www.answers.com/topic/penis-banding

And the article answered many of the questions posted here:

http://www.eunuch.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=2abec268e43a391a3a83154b6fce9fcc&t=8574

Take time to broaden your horizons before you reject something out of hand. It doesn’t do anyone any favors.

Mistress Taboo


 * I didn't say I was uninterested nor misunderstanding (thanks for copy/pasting a reply). My rationale of deleting had nothing to do with either.  The paramount policy on wikipedia is verifiability.  Linking to a couple of sites saying "this is what we do" and "this is what we call it" is not verifiable.  They are not reliable sources.


 * If the practice is legit, etc., etc. then you should have provided links to magazines or books or something more reliable.


 * The reason the page was deleted was to avoid the very reason you used it:


 * ...and gave it a hint of authority since it was on Wikepedia.


 * Wikipedia requires "authority" (by way of being published) for something to exist on it. You can't make WP be authoritative when you have no reliable sources backing it up.  Wikipedia is not a primary source!  Cburnett 21:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Penis banding Cont'
Who reads a book anymore? It’s all on the internet now a days! But for your information: Books with the subject:

Family Jewels: A guide to male genital play and torture by Hardy Haberman for a modest $12.95

Erotic Bondage Handbook by Jay Wiseman $16.95

FemDomme Queen Elise Sutton talks about it in her book Female Domination. For $24.95

So why should someone pay that much for a few lines that can be summed up on the web? I personally learned about it going to a Bondage seminar. But not everyone is out of the closet…

And just for your information BME is the foremost of authority for BDSM on the web.

Mistress Taboo


 * Precisely like I said in my delete vote: show me verifiable sources then I'll change my vote. Since the vote has been closed I can no longer do that.  Pull all those books on penis banding (with ISBNs, sans prices) and follow through with the deletion appeal. Cburnett 22:38, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

AIDS conspiracy theories
I expect to see your replies to my comments on the talk page. Then I guess you'll be disappointed, then. --Calton | Talk 03:01, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Ah, so you have no intention of participating...just reverting? Look up Strawman argument when you get the chance.

Also, just so I know, since I missed the memo: who died and left you in charge? --Calton | Talk 03:44, July 26, 2005 (UTC)


 * No one died, though 33 people put me in charge. Does that answer your question?  I just find it interesting that you revert an article you've never edited and have explicitly stated you'll never discuss the article. Cburnett 03:51, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

=January 14, 2007 archive end=