The Wikipedia Knowledge Dump (WikiDumper.org)

Wikipedia rejected that? Why? Extraterrestrial Sex Fetish was a great book!
 

Makes me wonder how many women used that as an excuse once the milk stopped getting delivered...wait, that makes no sense. Hmmm, better leave the humour to the experts.
Carry on,
j.
 

I wonder how many martians were accused of bad behavior once milk delivery went out of style...
 

so what now? george lucas is gay?
 

Cool page. Like the info very much. Also very entertaining.
 

Omg, anal probe?
 

So, Wikipedia deleted exophilia once I added to it, huh? Seems the Wikigods didn't like my sacrifice. Wankers. I was the one who added the parts about it being common once.
 

This article was deleted from the English Wikipedia on 15 November, 2006. Except in the case of an especially volatile article, a Wikipedia Administrator deletes an article only after a majority vote among interested Wikipedians calls for the deletion.

It's no wonder that this particular article was deleted; it consists almost entirely of false, unfounded, and/or speculative statements:

"Exophilia is an attraction, generally sexual in nature, to new, strange, or otherworldly things such as extraterrestrial lifeforms, supernatural beings, and robots. Exophilia may be regarded as the sexual form of neophilia..."

This is not a clinical definition, it is just the article author's definition.

"The 2001 book Extraterrestrial Sex Fetish by Supervert defines exophilia specifically as an erotic attraction to extraterrestrial beings and describes at length a character afflicted by this fetish."

This book is a work of fiction, and is not a credible source for defining a sexual paraphilia. Also, the article author doesn't know whether or not 'Supervert' coined the term. The article author's definition of the term is a subjective expansion of Supervert's definition. Finally, the author doesn't even accurately report Supervert's definition.

"Sometimes exophilia is regarded as a fetish..."

By whom? Why? 'Sometimes regarded' is an example of a weasel phrase. Sadly, Wikipedia is loaded with weasel words and phrases.

"... but some are born that way"

How do you know that? Does anyone know that? No, of course not.

"It also is linked to the belief of otherworldly entities, energies, and/or beings."

So it's impossible to fantasize about mythical or fictional beings without also believing that they're real?

"Because paraphilias are used for gratification..."

One doesn't "use" a paraphilia.

"Mythos from other cultures..."

'Other' as compared to what?

"...tell of spirit/alien/demigod/etc. couplings with humans that are sexual in nature, which gives hint that perhaps at one time exophilia was possibly more common."

Pure speculation. Writing your own hypotheses in a Wikipedia article hurts the project.

So we have a highly questionable definition of the term 'exophilia', followed by an author implying knowledge of the relative pervasiveness of the phenomenon, past and present.

Should the article have been purged from Wikipedia? Definitely. Are there other articles still in Wikipedia that are just as bad? Oh yes!
 

What is this, Attack of the Overanalytical Skeptic? Whatever terminology you use against me only makes me wonder why you are anonymous as well. How do I know? I am an exophile. I am regarded as asexual to everyone and for the sake of others' understanding, I say so. You may pick apart my entry and berate me, but who is it that does not read about Greek gods and mortal women? Jewish folklore tells of angels liking the women with their heads uncovered. Please do more history and open your mind. Not everyone is as perfect as you.