Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kali's teeth bracelet


 * 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 keep (non-admin closure) given lack of delete preferences apart from the nominator. Skomorokh 01:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Kali's teeth bracelet
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable, briefly produced fetish item without any verifiable reliable sources. Neitherday (talk) 06:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.   -- Fabrictramp (talk) 15:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep -- It's not the most prominent thing in the world, but its existence seems to be fairly widely known among BDSM-type enthusiasts of male chastity play, among whom it still has a few fans who construct home-made imitations of it. It's also mildly notorious among those in the know for the role it played in certain versions of an extreme female-supremacist ideology.  It's unfortunate that User:Neitherday can't seem to get past the fact that the main statement from the circle of individuals responsible for the original creation and/or promotion of the device ca. 1997 which is now still publicly accessible happens to be located on Geocities... AnonMoos (talk) 12:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The fact that so little about the creation of the device is available demonstrates it's lack of notability. Neitherday (talk) 03:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * There was a lot more information available on the web about ten years ago, but the great majority of it has suffered from "link rot" and the decline and fall of the Femina Society. Maybe some of that info is still available in old Usenet postings at groups.google.com and old versions of web-pages preserved on archive.org.  I don't see how such material would really make a great difference to keeping the article (since sufficient information about the extreme matriarchal ideology of the Femina Society and the role that the KTB  played in that ideology is still fairly easily discoverable by simple Googling), but if you think it would make a great difference, then I'm willing to dig around for it a little... AnonMoos (talk) 10:24, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete It seems as if you are basing the notability of this product on the its purported importance to the "ideology" of the Femina Society. However, I question if the Femina Society itself is notable. I come up with less than 300 hits on Google for "Femina Society", and many hits of those are not referring to the fetish group at all.
 * There are many short lived commercial sex toys out there, they don't all deserve a page on wikipedia. Neitherday (talk) 17:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Whatever -- I just got through telling you that most of the websites originally relating to the Femina Society have disappeared over time. Furthermore, the KTB was not a "short lived commercial sex toy". It was barely "commercial" at all, since it was a handcrafted item sold in relatively small quantities by female supremacists mainly to other female supremacists, and the ideological motive was probably at least important as the profit motive.  And the original inventors or sellers of the item didn't really view it as a "sex toy" in the usual sense at all, but rather a device by which a woman could maintain and increase her rightful dominating power over a man.  And it's not really "short-lived" either, since while it soon stopped being available through the original sellers, a small but steady stream of enthusiasts have continued to craft their own home made versions over the years (many of the pages turned up in this search refer to such attempts: "kali" @ tpe.com).  I don't know why you always bristle when I refer to the fact (which is true) that the Kali's teeth bracelet originated from the female-supremacist ideology held by the members of the Femina Society, but this habit of yours is becoming distinctly annoying by this point.  Frankly, I wish you had just left the article "Kali's teeth bracelet" completely alone, since none of your edits have been real improvements, and the article seems to have been better off before you started subjecting it to your attentions. AnonMoos (talk) 20:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:OWN, WP:NPA, and WP:CIVIL. Thank you. Neitherday (talk) 20:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not a violation of Wikipedia policy to realize that not everybody can usefully contribute to every single article. Part of being a good Wikipedia editor is knowing your own limitations, and gracefully refraining from editing articles which you're realistically unlikely to improve (I certainly have my own areas that I stay away from)... AnonMoos (talk) 20:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * This is an ad hominem attack. The usefulness of my edits is not defined by whether or not you agree with them. This page is for discussing the proposed deletion and not your views of me. Neitherday (talk) 20:44, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Minor correction: This search ("kali" OR "KTB" @ tpe.com) should turn up all the pages on the most prominent Internet chastity belt information site which refer to the device... AnonMoos (talk) 01:38, 7 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak keep Google gets me a few sources, e.g. . One of my more interesting google searches in the name of finding sources BTW. Also, please, no personal attacks; let's just discuss the validity of the article. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 13:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, here's the 1905 version: http://www.museumofquackery.com/devices/timely.htm ... AnonMoos (talk) 02:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * And here's an essay expressing the ideology of the Femina Society in relation to the KTB: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.women.supremacy/msg/37fd67f6d276a066?dmode=source -- AnonMoos (talk) 02:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * The first link JeremyMcCracken provided is a site selling a similar product.
 * The second link JeremyMcCracken provided is probably the best link I've seen for Kali's Teeth, but only briefly mentions it. I don't believe a brief mention is enough to help establish notability.
 * The first link provided by AnonMoos doesn't mention Kali's Teeth at all. The connection to Kali's Teeth Bracelet must be inferred. It is likely that the creators Kali's Teeth probably took inspiration from the older devise depicted. However, that does nothing to establish the notability of the modern Kali's Teeth Bracelet or the Femina Society. Neitherday (talk) 03:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The second link proveded by AnonMoos is a USENET post. USENET posts are not reliable sources.
 * There is still nothing here that demonstrates that Kali's Teeth Bracelet is anywhere near notable enough to warrant it's own article on Wikipedia. -Neitherday (talk) 03:01, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Whatever -- I consider it to be much more probable that the modern KTB creators invented their device completely independently of Dr. Foote's patent of 1906 (the details of the two devices are quite different). However, it shows that the basic idea has been recurring from time to time.  And you asked for more information about the Femina Society, but when I turned some up, then you didn't like the format it was in.  If you want information about the Femina Society, then archived Usenet posts will be the best way to find it, since the great majority of Femina Society websites have been down for years, and I don't have too many old URLs to try at archive.org.  Frankly, the combination of your adherence to narrow rigid technicalities of the letter of policies, together with your habit of making broad sweeping assertions about the subject-matter which happen to be factually wrong, is exactly what I haven't liked about your attitude towards this article from the beginning... AnonMoos (talk) 03:43, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Again, I request that you keep your comments focused on this deletion discussion and not on your opinion of me. -Neitherday (talk) 03:46, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: Notablity isn't the only problem with this article. "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth". There simply doesn't seem to be enough verifiable information out there to expand this article past a stub without adding a boatload of original research. -Neitherday (talk) 04:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep the various versions of this are widely advertised, and appear in the sort of fiction you'd expect to find them. Sources are findable, though they probably wont be from major newspapers--though one never knows these days. DGG (talk) 03:33, 5 April 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.