Talk:Donkey show

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why was this article deleted?[edit]

Can I ask why this article was deleted?

"History" section[edit]

This is a collection of pop-culture references and related trivia. It makes some remarkable claims that are not cited. (And whether "the first" or "an early" account, I think that needs sourcing. Are we really saying that this concept originated in or near 1984?)

If you can find something earlier then add it and change the wording. Doing math isn't original research or even remarkable, it's well ... doing math. Solving a polynomial equation, now that is remarkable. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 20:07, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am re-deleting the unsourced sentences. I will leave the sourced one this time, for now, but I would like to know what about it is relevant to the article. It appears to state only that the concept appeared in a film (and that the critic reviewing the film didn't care for the scene) -- what relevance does this have to the concept? Shimeru (talk) 07:36, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see it as 100% relevant and it is fully referenced and am restoring it. We can develop consensus as to whether it stays or goes here, but people need to see it to decide. The quote from the Godfather series is clearly sourced, I think what you may be arguing is that I did not provide a link. Did you attempt to type it into Google Books to see if it was correct before you removed it? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 16:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Bachelor Party" and the godfather novelization are primary sources. The facts they are referencing would be more watertight if you used secondary sources to cite. Did you ever look at the sources I brought up in the DRV? I think some useful info can come from those, and they are secondary sources as well. riffic (talk) 18:54, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I added all available sources. Plot summaries in Wikipedia in movie articles usually don't get sourced, the primary source is the film itself. Commentary gets sourced, like Seagal's reaction to the donkey show as a plot device. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 20:05, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, you misunderstand my objection. The article stated that this concept appears first in a film in 1984, and next in a novel in 2005. I want to know where that information comes from. I'm not disputing that it appears in those sources, but I want to see confirmation that the 1984 film was "first" or even "early" (that is, there's nothing else much before then) and that there are no other appearances until 2005. I think this is factually inaccurate, and if you want to keep it in the article, I demand a citation for it, because I cannot see how it could possibly be accurate. Shimeru (talk) 21:27, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Are you arguing that my math is incorrect? I am not following what your objection is. If you honestly don't believe that 1984 comes before 2005 in chronology, I am not sure what counter argument I can provide. Or are you arguing that they should be ordered with the most recent first? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 01:04, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm saying I don't believe that there was no mention of it before 1984 or between 1984 and 2005, and that is what the article states or stated. Shimeru (talk) 07:02, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As you know from college logic class, you can't prove a negative. I cannot prove that Martians do no exist, but if I show up with a Martian, I can prove they exist. You can only prove that you found a reference that predates the others listed. Anyway the point is moot, the wording was changed before you even posted what you just wrote. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 15:29, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, good show. That only leaves the question of what relevance the list of appearances in fiction has to the article on the... erm, phenomenon. Take apple, for instance: it mentions a few uses in mythology and legend in discussing the symbolism of the apple. It doesn't list "Apples appeared in Pearl Jam's Jeremy music video" or "Charlie Brown once presented an apple to his teacher," even though apples appeared in those places. What do these particular appearances of a donkey show contribute to general understanding of the topic, if anything? Shimeru (talk) 21:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It shows the penetration (pun intended) in US culture? --Enric Naval (talk) 10:57, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Except it doesn't. Three instances in three decades? So, what is there about these particular depictions that contributes to understanding of the topic? Shimeru (talk) 19:43, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
a bit of searching hasn't revealed much in secondary sources for the first two, which mention the donkey show (except I found a review for the bachelor show movie which referred to the pill popping donkey but not to any consequence.) The references to the show in Clerks 2 is well referenced, however, especially the reactions by Joel Silver and Kevin Smith. riffic (talk) 00:13, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The difference is that an apple probably has over 10M appearances in books and movies, For instance time travel is rarer in media, and of course a donkey show is even rarer in media. We seem to have found three. Perhaps if you can show me a guideline that forbids mentioning any topic that appears in the media. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 06:06, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Using a primary source as a 'proof' of mention in media is sort of original research, without any secondary sources. riffic (talk) 06:34, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The guideline you're looking for is WP:NOT, by way of WP:TRIVIA and the essay WP:HTRIVIA. Shimeru (talk) 07:14, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

House Ep[edit]

Can we mention it's a donkey show, but not the kind House (or the viewer) is expecting? :) Atrivedi (talk) 02:02, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/5_-mMQzkvYQ for context 64.52.27.22 (talk) 00:30, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?[edit]

I'm not sure why this article describes this as an urban legend since anyone who really wants can go to Tijuana and see such a show. I myself have seen this type of show at least six times. All that is needed is to tip a taxi drive, and they will take you to a club where this occurs. It *IS NOT* an "urban legend, and this "article" such that it is, is simply a "politically correct" attempt to imply such things do not actually take place. As I've said, I've seen it more than once and ANYONE with a $20 to a cab driver can as well. 76.22.32.86 (talk) 07:29, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i dont think we should be removing large sections of well referenced text with citations. threshold is verifiability not truth. riffic (talk) 19:23, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this is a reliable source, then I suggest you check WP:RS. Drmies (talk) 19:35, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch, thanks for that. riffic (talk) 06:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, who would fess up to having seen such a show, and more than once? Drmies (talk) 14:44, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How does one go about verifying these things? I'd assume that relevant pictures are of questionable legal status, let alone allowed on Wikipedia. I can confirm them from military deployments, and I have been multiple times. The first time being dragged out by civilian co-workers while thinking it was a myth myself.
I was notified of this page while telling someone about it in regards to how disturbing it was, and a bit confused at the myth status. I would also like to point out that the Ping pong show is confirmed, cited on Wikipedia, the target of a lot of civil rights discussion and--at the core of this subject--the same thing as the Donkey show. It is less a specific "show" and more of a bar/club attraction. I'd like information on how to confirm this, as I certainly have been. It's difficult, but not impossible to go again, and I could easily have someone in the area verify. As is, it seems like a Catch 22.
Bloodydaydream (talk) 14:44, 09 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
In the 50's when I was a pre-teen (maybe 7 - 9) my older brother and his friends would go down to Tijuana to drink and see the shows. My brother could use my dad's car if he took me along (my parents figuring he couldn't get into TOO much trouble and not realizing that we were going across the border). Yes, the donkey shows were real (and probably still are). I can remember sitting at a bar with a unfiltered Camel cigarette, and a beer with a shot-glass of tequila in it, watching the girls impale themselves on a donkey's dick on the center bar/stage (about 3'from my chair). Once they got it hard enough ("usually" using a feather to tickle it - I won't go into details), they'd tie ribbons on/around it at different distances and then people would pay the girls money to see how far (how many ribbons) the girl could reach (donkeys are quite well endowed) . It was quite a money maker for the girls and quite a unique education for me. 172.119.134.225 (talk) 16:43, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I saw one in Amsterdam in 1998. 57.135.233.22 (talk) 11:24, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

removing the quote from Godfather[edit]

Please discuss here why you are removing the reference to the Godfather and deciding that that one is trivia and the others are not trivia? It appears that you just do not like the passage that is quoted from the book. The passage is there, because people did not believe that there was a reference to it in the book. Remember Wikipedia is not censored. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 07:24, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's got absolutely nothing to do with being censored, but with attempting to resolve the maintenance tag on the article. If we leave the Godfather quote in place will you quit reverting? Nikkimaria (talk) 13:19, 3 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See also[edit]

Talk:Zoophilia/Archive_26#Donkey_Sex_in_Colombia. Apokrif (talk) 11:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Donkey_show&oldid=1201612489"