Jump to content

Talk:Anilingus

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 76.24.125.233 (talk) at 06:41, 10 October 2012 (→‎Do we really need the cartoon drawing of anilingus?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconPornography Start‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Pornography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of pornography-related topics 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.PornographyWikipedia:WikiProject PornographyTemplate:WikiProject PornographyPornography articles
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSexology and sexuality Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality 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.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

User:MrKIA11/Archive Box

Google hits

I do not believe that Google hits should be used as a metric for popularity of a phrase.

Let me give you some examples.

  • Look at Spreading and choking. It says that this is often referred to as "trapping". Let's look up "ink trapping" on google: [1]. 3920 hits.
Amazon.com gives me [2] 19 books, including some well-respected books on printing.
  • Byron the Bulb (a fictional immortal light bulb from Gravity's Rainbow) [3]: 2500 Google hits.
Centennial light (a real 100-year-old light bulb) [4]: 5170 Google hits.
  • United States that Matter [5]: 19 Google hits. It's currently a meme that's quite popular on Fark ([6]) and moving elsewhere. Notable? Not at this point. But it's certainly more popular than 19 hits would suggest.
It's Raining McCain [7]: 35,800 hits.

I'd be willing to bet good money that a random telephone survey would show that more people are familiar with trapping than the McCain Girls. But Google suggests the opposite. superlusertc 2008 May 02, 04:54 (UTC)

Change the name back to analingus

I think that it would be better if the name of this article was Analingus. This would be more consistent with the articles about cunnilingus and fellatio. Does anybody agree with me? Maybe I'm off my rocker, but I think Analingus is a more common way to refer to this act than Anal-oral sex

--WordsOnLitmusPaper (talk) 19:00, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well no one has complained since 15 November 2004, when that title was last used (according to the page history). Since the target name is in use (as a redirect, but with several lines of history), you would have to propose it with the requested move procedure as only admins can do the move.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 01:03, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it should be changed. However, the spelling is actually anilingus, not analingus. JGabbard (talk) 05:09, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree, both with the name change, and your spelling, which is preferred. Joefromrandb (talk) 02:45, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, as two editors want it - I'll start the ball rolling for you. Please make your !vote and reasons case below the move template at the bottom of the page.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:22, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jaw stimulation?

From the article: "For the receiver pleasure comes from both (psychologically) from the fact that they are getting their ass licked, and physically from the sensitive nerve endings surrounding the anal opening, which are not typically stimulated by the tongue and lips but the jaw."

The sensitive nerve endings surrounding the anus ('anal opening' is clumsy, btw) are "typically stimulated by the jaw"? What??
Complete nonsense and should be removed/edited. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.71.51.33 (talk) 05:25, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Plus... has anyone read the rest of that paragraph? "For the receiver pleasure comes from both (psychologically) from the fact that they are getting their ass licked..."
Are we real here? Someone edit this tripe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.71.51.33 (talk) 05:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
{{sofixit}} -mattbuck (Talk) 12:57, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it. Joefromrandb (talk) 02:48, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 68.35.163.149, 15 February 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} This image is totally unneccesary. Please remove it. I can't block everything from my computer and enjoy using wikipedia however I don't think that this type of image should be allowed. Especially as it is not useful.68.35.163.149 (talk) 04:35, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Wikipedia is not censored. --Closedmouth (talk) 08:30, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was move per request.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:15, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anal–oral sex → Anilingus — Two editors have requested the page be moved back to its old name.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 23:25, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
  • Support - I feel that anilingus is the proper clinical term for this article. "Anal-oral sex" is not the term, but is merely the definition of the term. I took the same position for the same reason when "seminophagia" was considered to be "not a real word" so was changed to "semen ingestion" (after briefly also being known as "spermophagia)," before it was finally (and improperly) deemed to be not worthy of an article at all so was merged into the already ponderous "semen" article (rather than the separate "sperm" article, curiously). By now I have grown quite accustomed to my counsel not being heeded, but do not hesitate to give it when it is requested! FAVOR rename.JGabbard (talk) 00:21, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -mattbuck (Talk) 00:53, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - it does appear to be the norm for the common latin name to be used for these types of articles - eg Fellatio instead of Penis-oral sex - and uniform treatment is preferable in an encyclopedia.--Kubigula (talk) 03:36, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - JGabbard is correct. "Anal-oral" sex is the definition of the term "anilingus". Similar to the above point, our "cunnilingus" article isn't called "vaginal-oral sex". And for heaven's sake, let's change this before the hyphen/dash war finds its way to this article. Joefromrandb (talk) 16:09, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - I agree with the editors' points above. Rename this article, please. Nightmareishere (talk) 01:42, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Do we really need the cartoon drawing of anilingus?

Give me a break, people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.140.232 (talk) 02:10, 10 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

YES, of course! It is CRUCIAL to our understanding of the topic,as the text alone can't "tell the whole story". CLEARLY it is here for the reader's GENERAL INFORMATION, and NOTHING ELSE! This is, after all, a professional reference tool. Oh, by the way, "wikipedia isn't censored." 128.210.27.106 (talk) 19:41, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The topic of "Asslicking" doesn't need pictures. It's selfexplanatory and pictures add nothing. This is the guideline on offending pictures: 

 Including information about offensive material is part of Wikipedia's encyclopedic mission. Wikipedia is    
 not censored. However, images that can be considered offensive should not be included unless they are 
 treated in an encyclopedic manner. Material that would be considered vulgar or obscene by typical 
 Wikipedia readers should be used if and only if its omission would cause the article to be less 
 informative, relevant, or accurate, and no equally suitable alternative is available.

Without this picture this article doesn't get less informative, relevant or accurate. Based on the guidelines it doesn't belong here. I deleted it. --85.179.193.142 (talk) 00:33, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted per WP:BRD and WP:GRATUITOUS; the illustration is of the article's subject and is thus not gratuitous. AV3000 (talk) 05:03, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Concur with and support AV3000. The image belongs here. JGabbard (talk) 15:50, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]


No, the current image of two women does not need to be there, especially when one's vulva is hanging out. It's obviously gratuitous and in no way "treated in an encyclopedic manner" as stated in the guidelines. While anyone can engage in analingus, it's much more commonly a homosexual male act. Either the image should be replaced with one that's more accurate or it should be removed entirely. It's CLEARLY gratuitous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Honeycat995 (talk • contribs) 23:11, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find or create a better image, then go for it. Otherwise, the long running consensus on this and similar pages is to use a drawn illustration.--Kubigula (talk) 03:29, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus you people

Which nun wrote this article? Sounds like a puritan was given internet access.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anilingus&oldid=516962424"