Wetlook World Forum

The wetlook article, you can see who wrote it by viewing the article history. I gave it an overhaul ages ago, and it's been revised by others since then.

I was planning to illustrate the article -- especially since it's a visual subject -- but that idea fell apart over trying to illustrate the non-sexual side, such as swimming in clothes for fun -- just too hard to get information from people who participate, and to obtain pictures with permission that I could post. I never managed to get any feedback on how many images would be suitable (without overloading the page) and just what subjects should be chosen for them -- e.g. modelled, romantic, candid (with permission). I have candidate images from Styx I can use, but some of them require permission from Kev and Graham never gave me a decision (and I can't decide whose I wanted to use and why!!) Jennifer and Todd will let me use a photo also, but again, I can't bloody decide which, I think too much about what the subtle implications of each might be without a clear enough vision of what I want.

But anyone who wants to finish it off knows where to look for two images. But plenty of people get wet for fun and *that* is the hardest to represent. I'd prefer a pool party image or a beach image but I can't get hold of one, not even after mailing all the clothed swimming clubs (very poor response too, most ignored my mail). Swimming Fully Clothed was very helpful but the images are not his and he had none to offer at the time.

Certainly, Arthur's article is a very interesting cross-over that could certainly enhance the quality of the Wikipedia article far more than anything I would have written could. And the longer it becomes, the more pictures you can sneak in without visually overwhelming the page.

But I do recommend receiving input from more than one person else you risk writing a biased article based on an unreliable source. Too much of Arthur's article feels like personal opinion and speculation to be valid for Wikipedia, and someone removed some of my own text from the article for the same reason. In cases like these it helps to refer to a variety of other sources. For me personally I was not aware it was anyone but just me until 1999 and I've obviously not had a lot of first-hand experience.

As a stand-alone article, it's fine. For Wikipedia, the standards are much higher and they very much appreciate a list of references to credible material. Something wetlook rather lacks =)