Talk:Major Disciplines

From BDSM Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

The point raised on the Fetish page's discussion tab is a valid one I think, can we instead of listing Types of (blank) Disiplines on the subpages of this, just link a fetish page on them, then the actual fetish page in the menu can just be an alphabetized listing of all of them in one place.

Actually, may be able to tag pages if I remember MediaWiki correctly, and then the Fetish page won't have to be maintained at all as it would be automated to list all the tagged pages. Then again, it has been a long time since I seriously contributed to a wiki before, so things easily could have changed since then.

Tersia (talk) 01:58, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

What is the difference between a discipline and a fetish? Also, why are some "disciplines" considered major? This is a totally artificial distinction.

Anonymous (talk)

On looking into the technology side of things, there are categories that we could use to auto-list something, or make use of certain extensions. See here for some suggestions others have made for a similar situation.

Tersia (talk) 03:20, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Dropping in about the major disciplines, the fetish pages is something I'm planning on restructuring but will be an alphabetized list, the major disciplines though are intended to eventually link to specific articles for major areas, for example the examples listed in fire play will each be discussed on the fire play page... the notion is that this way people can learn about kink through major concepts, not by sorting through an enormous alphabetized list they will never get through.

The reason they end in dead links right now is because I haven't created the pages yet, they are just place holders for how I was planning to organize them.

Further, not all fetishes fall reasonably under a major discipline because folks can fetishize anything, an example might be drinking breast milk, which is sort of food fetish and sort of medical play, but really not either of those things, so having a redundant fetish/kink list and having the major disciplines seems to be the best way to fascilitate new people being able to learn through seeing large concepts and narrowing their scope based on interest, which is the idea behind having the major disciplines.

Point being, each of those dead things on the list will be a page or possibly a series of pages, eventually, depending on the amount of content. Further, tags for categories will also be used once we get more of the wiki fleshed out. --Admin (talk) 05:38, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

"I'm planning on restructuring", "are intended", "I haven't created the pages", "I was planning" --- You DO realize that as a wiki, this is a communal effort, and it's not about what YOU want, but what everyone wants? If you wanted to make this a webpage, you could just make it a webpage. Once you open it up to people's input, you'll have to accept that your own artificial distinctions can get questioned and overridden. -- Wulfrath
I feel this is tangential, but it deserves to be said. The Admin was only presenting how they foresaw the structure of the site when they created the disciplines. True, it is a communal effort, but that doesn't mean they have to sit on the sidelines as the work is done either. Tersia (talk) 18:33, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
In terms of overall structure, I can see where you were going now, but again I think we should list some of the related fetishes eventually underneath the disciplines, and right now I don't see where that'll happen. And just because a fetish is linked from one place doesn't mean it can't be linked from another as well, addressing your drinking breast milk example. Plus, if you intend for them to be their own pages in time, you could set up a link to it now to encourage people to create said pages. This is a community effort after all. Seeing a red link tells me there's an opportunity to create something, and contribute. Tersia (talk) 18:33, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

A very good point. If anyone wants to red up those entries, please do. While I am able to do a lot, I've put in probably 10-16 hours a day on this since I started it, but I can't take care of everything, and yes, that does mean the community has a voice. It is not a web page, it is a wiki, very intentionally. My ideas and vision about structure were loose intentionally because I feel very secure that none of us is as good as all of us.--Admin (talk) 20:21, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Removing "Discipline"

Because it sounds silly. We don't say "Oh, I'm skilled in the discipline of fire", we say "I'm skilled in fire play". So someone's going to have to change the names of the pages (Fire Discipline -> Fire Play) and such stuff. Before anyone says anything, all things fire fall under fire play. Also, wax is under fire play, and I'm pretty sure it should be under sensation play at the very least, since the fire isn't the actual thing causing the sensation.

Same thing goes with Medical.

I'd rather call these major groups than major disciplines and refer to them as umbrella terms rather than "disciplines" because... eugh, mouthfuls. Sabryna (talk)