Talk:Jagoff

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Pittsburgh Start‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pittsburgh, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pittsburgh and its metropolitan area on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PittsburghWikipedia:WikiProject PittsburghTemplate:WikiProject PittsburghPittsburgh articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Linguistics Start‑class High‑importance

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I am replacing "

This Pittsburgh-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

" with "

" as this is clearly not a stub article any more. Would another editor please determine if the expand section tag is necessary? I am doing this according to the "be bold" declaration on Wikipedia:Stub#Removing_stub_status. Tucoxn (talk) 01:50, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This word is used fluently in Chicago so there is no problem for David Mamet using it in Glengarry, Glen Ross. https://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20160916/bridgeport/word-jagoff-finally-makes-oxford-english-dictionary — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.196.54.103 (talk) 23:41, 16 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

vs. "Jack-off"

The article, or at least the Pittsburghers quoted therein, seems pretty insistent that "jagoff" has nothing at all to do with "jack-off" or anything else related to masturbation. The OED connects the terms, though, and I'm more inclined to believe them. It would be good to see more sources on this issue, especially those with a more neutral point of view. It's clear people in Pittsburgh are attached to the term, and might have motivation to downplay its sexual origins. (Don't let my tone fool you—I think the term is delightful too.) --BDD (talk) 18:11, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, it seems a clear case of semantic drift and doesn't mean "jack off" anymore, but it surely derives from there. Pointedly absent in this article is any actual etymology, despite quoted screes against those for not knowing it. JesseRafe (talk) 15:30, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Came here to say this, its obviously derivative. People can make that claim if they want, but I dunno why it's being basically "supported" in this article, like there's any hope of truth to the claim. Mercster (talk) 14:36, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago?

is this useful? http://www.chicagomag.com/city-life/November-2019/Jagoff/ Victor Grigas (talk) 02:26, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]