Jump to content

Talk:Fuck/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ericd (talk | contribs) at 20:21, 23 September 2002 (No fuck unprotected yeah !). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Actually, AFAIK, German ficken is the correct root, which in turn has the same root as the German word zwicken (to nip of pinch).

Also, should we link to The fuck page? --Magnus Manske 19:07 Sep 23, 2002 (UTC)


...criminal charges of obsenity.

Is that true? I thought obscenity is defined as pornography that's too strong for community standards. AxelBoldt 14:07 Sep 23, 2002 (UTC)

The text mentions Joyce. Miller, and Bruce, all of whom were arrested before Miller v. California (1973), which created the "prurient interest/community standards" doctrine you mention. --LDC

Please explain to me why "swearword" and "taboo word" are "superfluous" links. Also, could you please specify why Brussels is a relevant link. Thirdly, what is the point of adding a 655 page English usage manual to a bibliography on the word fuck?

Looking forward to hearing from you -- KF 23 Sept 2002, 17:05


If there was really a point to this article, I'd like to know what it was. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Why not write about obscenity, censorship, or community standards or taboo words or something general like that? --Ed Poor


Holy shit, Stephen! I forgot to "move" the text before deleting the article!! What the fuck was I thinking?! --Ed Poor


Etymology : Maybe from the french "foutre" now very old fashionned but common till XIX century ?

Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary has "akin to Dutch fokken to breed (cattle), Swedish dialect fokka to copulate" --Ed Poor

IMHO it's so old that is has the same unknown origin in latin and saxon languages.


F.U.C.K. at Woodstock !


" which has a highly suggestive hieroglyph. " Please, please we want a picture !


As far as I can see, the article consists of two things - a historical account of the use and acceptance or lack thereof of fourletter words, and etymological guesses. The second part is iirc explicitly listed as one thing not to include in articles (although I don't remember in what policy or whatever I read it) and the first part should by any reason be placed in an article about profanity in general. If there's ever a vote on deleting this article - moving the (in many ways otherwise very good) content if desired - count me in as voting for deleting it. -- User:OlofE


I protected the page, to prevent any _more_ gratuitious deletions. Apparently I have started a trend; I had no idea I was a role model for vandals! It's very embarrassing. --Ed Poor 20:18 Sep 23, 2002 (UTC)


No fuck unprotected yeah !