Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human toilet


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete: arguments for keeping failed to address the concerns. `'Míkka>t 20:47, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Human toilet

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article describes an apparently non-notable perversion. The singular reference to an unreliable source provided fails to establish the practice's notability per the general notability guideline, or any other notability guidelines. John254 18:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete no evidence of documentation beyond some random fetish site. --Rividian (talk) 19:01, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge to urolagnia. This is real fetish with a long doccumented history in many cultures. I believe the term "human toilet" is used in the bdsm community for urolagnia. This article is really just in need of better references but it is notable if somewhat bizzare.Nrswanson (talk) 19:34, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The references actually need to be found first for the claim to have much meaning... theoretically there could be references about absolutely anything. --Rividian (talk) 19:37, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * True. I'm not particularly interested in the topic so I really don't want to take the time to do it. My point in making the comment was to point out that I don't think verifiable sources will be difficult to find for this article.Nrswanson (talk) 19:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Nevertheless, they still need to be found, whether we're interested in the topic or not. --Rividian (talk) 19:56, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge and Redirect to urolagnia lk (talk) 20:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Question. Why are there suggestions for a merge with urolagnia, but not for a merge with Coprophilia?-- brew  crewer  (yada, yada) 02:43, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
 * comment human toilet is more about stool than pee, pee would fall into "watersports/golden showers/urolagnia/urofilia" as for this article this is a definitive keep, needs help with sourcing and content though, i suggest we ask at wipipedia the BDSM wiki encyclopedia. this is a definitely a notable practice but needs more RSMY♥IN chile 07:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Completely revolting to some but certainly notable practice. Treat encyclopedicly and please take a shower. Banj e  b oi   00:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This is not the proper article to read while having dinner (trust me on that). But it doesn't deserve to be deleted -- enhancement is always better than erasure. Ecoleetage (talk) 01:07, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Not my kink, that's for sure. But is notable.  Article needs much work.  Atom (talk) 03:46, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Not only are the notability standards - nontrivial substantial coverage in reliable sources - not met, the article also fails WP:V for lacking documentation in reliable sources, which is is particularly important in articles dealing with bodily functions.   Sandstein   16:16, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.