Talk:BDSM as business: Interviews with Dominatrixes

Original Reporting notes
Interviews conducted in person on October 3, 2007. --David Shankbone 21:50, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Pluralization?
This is a really cool story. But the classicist in me has to cringe when a word unchanged from the latin is pluralized by english rules. It's like saying bacteriums or matrixes. I looked at a few dictionaries and, though 'dominatrices' is always first, about half include 'dominatrixes' as an alternative. Although notably, while I was writing this firefox just underlined the second spelling as incorrect. I guess that most dominatrices don't give a hoot about latin cognates, but the pedant in me just had to drop my 2c in. 74.136.216.158 04:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, that picture is a lot hotter than you see in my local newspaper. Out of curiousity, what's the raunchiest picture you could include in wikinews that would be 'allowed?'  I know that wikipedia is not censored, but how does that cross over here? I guess I'm just too lazy to sift through the rules myself, if there is any hard and fast rule on that.  74.136.216.158 04:24, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * "Dominatrixes" is commonly accepted if not in The Oxford Dictionary, at least in the BDSM community (and on Wikipedia as well). As to the photo, it's hot, but there is no nudity involved.  Since we aren't censored, I think it comes down to judgment calls, and here it was the only photo with all three interviewees, who are all clothed; it's also illustrative of the subject matter in the article.  I don't think it is something that needs a lot of consideration.  Our sex/BDSM industry-related articles and photography will not be prolific.  That said, I would *love* to see Brian McNeil or Steven Fruitsmaak interview the head of the Prostitute Union in the The Netherlands.  --David Shankbone 04:43, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Who is "B"?
under "Advice for those who want to be a Mistress", there's the line "B: We train people here." where "B" is neither bolded or identified (is that Bill?), and the line ids not indented, but I'm not sure if that was intended. 74.56.65.168 02:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that was Bill. He popped his head for a few moments during the interview but I chased him out.  I meant to remove those lines from the transcription.  Thanks for pointing it out.  I'll strip it out.  --David Shankbone 03:46, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Why should he be chased out. Why are his comments not fit for the interview? --SVTCobra 03:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Because the interview was with the dominatrixes, and not with Bill, who I had already interviewed for over an hour. I wanted employers and employees separate.  --David Shankbone 05:07, 30 October 2007 (UTC)