Talk:Cleanse

	This Alternative medicine related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Overwrote

SS, I'm not sure what I overwrote, trouble is, I had made many "small" edits all over the article, and was too lazy to do them again when I EC'd. Mia apologetica. ħuman 04:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Religious Usage

I'm surprised I don't see anything about $cientology in this section, given their emphasis on toxicity in their teachings. I don't know a lot about it though. --17:36, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Ganges River Mini-Essay Status

@Bongolian I noticed that you removed my mini-essay about the cleanliness of the Ganges River from this article. For a hot minute, I was going to let that decision stand; given your edit summary's reasoning about "open defecation once being the norm", it indicates that pre-scientific people just recklessly taking dumps in rivers without a care for whether or not they'd be using that water for drinking, bathing, or other such purposes later, and the Ganges River isn't special in regards to being abused beyond reason. But then I realized that your summary didn't actually address the point of my mini-essay: how and why did the Ganges River specifically become regarded as spiritually and perpetually clean, regardless of whatever people did to it, to the point where Hindus still regard it as the cleanest river in the world in spite of it being a polluted-to-hell cessflow of filth by any physical, reality-based measurement? I don't have an answer to that question, but it still needs to be raised IMO. --Luigifan18 (talk) 23:08, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

@DuceMoosolini What I said to Bongolian still applies. Out of all the rivers in the world that humanity has polluted, why does the Ganges hold religious significance to the point that a substantial portion of India's population refuses to acknowledge that it's literally unclean? I don't want to edit war here, and maybe my mini-essay isn't the best way to get the point across, but there has to be some sort of reason why the Ganges gets special treatment. --Luigifan18 (talk) 05:34, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Probably for the same reason the Egyptians considered the Nile important or the Mesopotamians and the Euphrates? Regardless, the fact that your essay contains multiple instances of Template:Fact is not a good omen for it being in mainspace. Plutocow (talk) 05:39, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Also lol "I won't go into an edit war over this" then proceeds to get into an edit war. Plutocow (talk)

I don't want to edit war, but I do think you're giving up on this mini-essay a little bit too soon. The Nile is pretty much the only major river in Egypt. The Mesopotamians had two rivers (the Tigris and the Euphrates) that they regarded as equally important IIRC. I think India has more major rivers than just the Ganges, but I'll have to get back to you on that one. Regardless, the article as I originally found it implied that the Ganges River is more important and sacred in Hinduism than any other river in India. I know that travel wasn't easy in early historic times, so people who lived near the Ganges couldn't just pack up and move to another river on a whim, but still, why did the Ganges become more important than any other Indian river? I think that question deserves an answer. --Luigifan18 (talk) 05:49, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

"Mini-essays" (opinions where you say, "I didn't really go out of my way to fact check.") do not belong in mainspace. That is why we have essayspace. Bongolian (talk) 06:02, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

This mini-essay wasn't me sharing an opinion, it was me speculating. --Luigifan18 (talk) 06:11, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

That's not exactly what mainspace is for either. There's a reason essayspace exists, y'know. Plutocow (talk) 06:19, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

You still haven't really given a solid reason for outright removing the mini-essay rather than trying to improve it… --Luigifan18 (talk) 14:59, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

If you want it to be improved instead of removed, do so yourself. Christopher (talk) 15:27, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

I was planning on doing so, but then someone protected the page. --Luigifan18 (talk) 17:59, 11 December 2022 (UTC)