Talk:List of ethnic slurs/Archive 3

Oreo

Used to insult African American people who act "white" or have partial white ancestry. Similar to Twinkie referring to Asians "acting white." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.192.80.129 (talk) 20:22, 28 December 2006 (UTC).

I've heard that slur used also, but I recently moved it to #Quarantine awaiting a citation. Art LaPella 00:10, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Hick

Usually used to be offensive against people from the Appalachian area, particularly people from Kentucky. I know you suggested not using ones from particular states, but this one is considered really offensive (I'm from Kentucky, I know), and people use it without realizing. Also, Redneck is oftentimes considered offensive by people from the south.

None of those are ethnic in nature. L0b0t 21:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Ginger

As in "ginger kids", pale white people with freckles and red hair. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mwalle (talk • contribs) 05:04, 6 December 2006 (UTC).

Merging of Rosbeef / Rosbif

I merged these entries (deleting Rosbeef and expanding on Rosbif) basically because it's redundant having both there when one will serve, and also because the explanation for "Rosbeef" was largely incorrect. It's not a large edit, but because this is such a controversial page I thought it needed adding here.--Capreolus 11:25, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Gussic

I added an entry on a well known Alaskan native term for white man. There aren't too many sources on line, but I found one discussion of it. In regard to the self-application, I know of one St. Mary's flying service in the bush that calls its holding company "Gussic Ventures" in this spirit. My sense is Gussic has lost some of its edge over the decades but it is still a negative term. It is certainly much more negative than "cheechako" is currently, and both liguistically and geographically distinct. The author of my source suggests the term is rooted in "Cossack" and I've heard this as well, but I don't know that anyone has confirmed it. It is in common use in English among locals in SW and SC Alaska. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cosmoline (talk • contribs) 20:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Hadji (Had-jgee)

That's what we (U.S. Army lower enlisted soldiers) often called the locals and enemies while in Afghanistan and Iraq; we realized that "Hadji" could be used both in a derogatory and at times (if a Muslim male had made the Hadj to Mecca) in a proper and respectful manner depending on the situation, circumstance, tone, intent, context, etc (for example, we called our translator, who apparently made the trip to Mecca "Hadji- man" and we held him in very high regard as he saved our butts numerous times! But then we would turn and say something like "that f'n hadjee is firing at me, get some m'er f'er"! BANG! BANG! BANG! Hadji-man knew the difference and understood with no offense or apparent problem- actually- I think we started calling them Had-gees after hearing him.). Anyway, "hadjee" is apparently a modern "politically correct" battlefield term that can skate the razor thin line of political correctness since the Army no longer lets soldiers use condescending terms for the enemy and local people anymore (like "gook" in the Vietnam War, "kraut" and "nip" in WW2, etc). The soldier on the battlefield certainly does know the meaning of "Had-gee" and Hadji, the difference between the two, and is quite capable to get around all the PC crap and still use our little slurs when he or she wants (I guess it is an example of political correctness run amuck in WAR -they can shoot at us and we can shoot them but we can't call them names like "dune-billy" and "sand-nigger" because, and understandably particularly in regard to the n-word in the sand-nigger slur, are way out-of-bounds in our PC military, go figure.). Anyway, sorry for the long editorial but I thought it might help give some history and perspective to whoever might do the potential entry into the main article here. And, just for the record, I do love and respect the good and beautiful Afghani and Iraqi people, it was just the a-holes that were trying to kill me, my buddies, and innocent people (and oh, by the way, you too -remeber 9/11?) that I have a "predjudice" against. HUAH!

Moss Head

Should state the origin, that being that negros have hair that looks like brown moss.

Terrone

This term is used for people from South of Italy of semitic anchestry, non white italian.

Dog Eater / Dog Muncher

(U.S.) someone of Filipino or Vietnamese descent. 'Dog Eater' also used against the Lakota for their practice of 'white dog feasts' (the white dog believed to be sacred) by whites, neighboring tribes, and even other Sioux tribes from the Dakota dialect who did not share this tradition/ritual. Generally considered quite offensive by the Lakota.

Doesn't it apply to Chinese and Korean, too? I saw on Travel Discovery Channel: a caucasian guy travel to Japan and eat exotic food. Such as, toad's moving heart, and etc. And for those who do not know, not all asian eat meat.--68.122.70.11 23:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Korean people still do eat dog. Not like a steak, but as a soup. In Korean, it is called Bo Shin Tang. From what I hear it is not very common and only eaten in remote villages away from the big cities. When people are hungry they will eat anyhting, and thats' how I was told the practice came to be (unsigned comment)

Hamburgers

that's the name of the Americans (USA citizens) in Poland (sometimes)

"USA citizens" is not an ethnicity, so this term seems irrelevant to this article Bobbyi 15:14, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Boat people

I remember this used for the people escaping Viet Nam, etc. after it became communist. It was used with sympathy for them, not a slur. Has this changed? Steve Dufour 06:06, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Being from europe I recall this term used in news and media coverage to paint a graphic image of the hardship and the circumstances the refugees had to battle with.

Zhid / Yid

I searched zhid and this article came out. However, where is the meaning of the word? In Russian language it's a derigatory term for Jews. Can someone add it please? I'm a new user and cannot edit this article.--Glushak 10:01, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

• The problem there, I think, would be that zhid (or, properly, жид) is a Russian word, and this is the English Wikipedia. There is no question that it is a real ethnic slur, and would be very easy to document, but it simply isn't an ethnic slur in English--although its English equivalent, yid, probably should be on this list. I'm actually suprised that it isn't, particularly given some of the neologismic entries that this list has had. I'm not adding it myself because I assume that it must have been on this list in the past at some point, and was removed for some reason (I don't have time to sift through the entire edit history to check). If you want to add it ("yid" not "жид"/"zhid"), I certainly won't argue, however. And, incidentally, you should be able to edit the article unless you've been blocked for some reason. ergot 16:34, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
• The word YID is in this section, but I question whether it should be. Is 'Jewish' an ethnicity? Surely it is a religion and should be considered in the same way as slurs against Christians, Catholics, Muslims etc. The assumption that 'Muslim' and 'Jew' refer to ethnicity is racist enough in itself.

Porch Monkey

add porch monkey for those of you that havent heard this word or seen Clerks 2 it means a lazy black person, althought the point of its appearance in the movie is to change it from a racial slur to a word to describe any lazy person - Avenged Evanfold 05:00, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Do people say this in real life, not just in the movies? Steve Dufour 04:43, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, people do say this in real life. I realize "some WP user agrees that he heard it somewhere" is a pretty pathetically low standard, but it is still a higher standard than has been observed by most editors of this article. My Alt Account 16:26, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I guess it should stay then. I've never heard it, but then out here in California people don't spend much time sitting on their front porches.  :-) Steve Dufour 16:59, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I think the connotation of the phrase is something like "unemployed welfare recipient," hence, sitting out front all day, watching the world go by. My Alt Account 00:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

never thought i'd ever have to explain this one... this slur was culled from the combination of 'porch' (where they sit and hang out) and 'monkey' (a common slur in reference to blacks) --138.27.1.2 18:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC) (aka Clown)

The discussion was about if the expression was used in real life, not what it means. Although I must say that monkeys look more like white people than like black people. Check this out next time you are at the zoo. Steve Dufour 02:51, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I was just reading this talk page and had to just comment on Dufour's "they look more like white people"....I'm laughing at this...but it's really not funny...are you blind, or just an apologist/idiot? User:Anon 03:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Well...very thin lips, nearly flat buttocks...and add that to the fact that we're the hairiest race, and I'd say that we DO look the most like monkeys, lol. 09:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)Anon

don't forget about the nigger knife. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sr71blackbird (talk • contribs) 04:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC).

Chink

There doesn't seem to be an entry for this term. E Batterschoom 12:54, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes there is. `'mikkanarxi 19:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

The Man

Check out its own outstanding article. However I still don't think it is an ethnic slur. Steve Dufour 17:01, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Gweilo, gaijin, gringo

I restored gweilo. I assume it was deleted because it is a Cantonese word. But English-speakers in Hong Kong use it. Of course, when an English-speaker uses it, it is not intended as a slur. It's the equivalent of gaijin for Japan and gringo for Mexico, i.e. they are words used by English-speakers who understand them to be slurs in another language. Both of those words remain on the list. (Actually, I think gaijin should be removed since it is standard Japanese and not normally a slur.) Kauffner 15:51, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

When I trimmed the foreign words out I left "gaijin" and "gringo" because they are used by English speakers. However if they are not used as slurs then they shuold be removed. -Will Beback 01:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

As someone who speaks Japanese and lives in Japan 4 months a year, I can assure you gaijin is not a slur, it is short for gaikokujin. The key issue is this, many Japanese do not like outsiders, but to call someone an outsider is not ment as a slur. Hope this helps.--Caligvla 02:34, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

LOL, sure, the word is formal enough, now, can you warrant main use is devoid of negative connotations? No slur to the Japanese, but they are ethnocentric enough that any term dealing with foreigners can hardly avoid being connoted negatively. --Svartalf 17:41, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

The negative connotations are only there because the person didn't do their homework. When a Japanese person says it they mean no ill will, if they wanted to disparage an outsider they would say "kichiku beihei" (dirty barbarian).--Caligvla 06:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I Thought Gringo Was A White Boy And Gringa was white girl I'm not sure about the history of the word or watever but were im from Gringo Is A Word Used by Puerto Ricans/Latinos. Usually if you're "Cool With Them They Call You Gringo But Not Always A Ethinic Slur Just Like Out Here A Black Guy Might Call A White Guy Yo White Boy But It Might Not Always Be A Racial Slur"

I'm not exactly sure of the true meaning or history of the word. I guess it is just slang over here in Philadelphia. I was told by a person from Latin America that he used the word "gringo" in protests against US military personnel in Latin America during times of governmental upheaval. He said that the US military wore green, so the Spanish-speaking protestors would yell "Green Go!" to make their protestations understood. He said that because of this the troops became known as gringos, and the term came to include any person from the US, especially pushy people.

Check out Gringo and Talk:Gringo.Skookum1 19:58, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Mickey Mouse

entry lists it as "negro slang". Is that an oversight, or is some logic to using negro instead of black or African American? If there is a reason, it might be worth putting that in the list, since my first reaction was to change it to black. Natalie 03:08, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Some of these entries were copied from old slang dictionaries. I suspect that this is such a case. Since it's doubtful that it's used anymore, we might just drop the entry entirely. The listed source is for a non-ethnic usage. -Will Beback 20:57, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. Natalie 20:49, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Alter kacker / alter kocker

Leck misch in d´r Täsch! Ich bin zwar kein Jüdisch-Experte, aber das scheint mir eine deutscher Ausdruck zu sein !--134.155.36.20 12:25, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

I think it says "My pocket leaks!" (probably means something like "Wow!") "I'm no Jewish expert at all, but that looks like a German expression to me!" Art LaPella 18:04, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Probably some Yiddish or dialectal variant of "Leck mich am Arsch!". (Lit. "Lick me in ass!", in meaning it's something like "Bite me!" or "Kiss my ass!".) No offense, but your translation would have a very strange word order for a German sentence. I guess the point is that "Kocker" is Yiddish, "Kacker" is german... 惑乱 分からん 03:03, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Armenian Shower

Is this the right article to list this term? For those of you who don't know, in the USA, Europe and Russia, the term "Armenian Shower", refers to an Armenian who had not bathed or showered, yet uses an excessive amount of perfume or other sented product to try to mask their body odor. The end result being an overpowering combination of offensive sents. Usage, "Smells like s/he just took an Armenian Shower." "He was so depressed, he tried to commit suicide by inhaling next to an Armenian." - Woody Allen from Love and Death In Armenian culture it is considered unhealthy to bathe more than once a week. --Softy Papa 03:22, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, this is the place. One use of the term appears on Google.[1] If we had a better source than a forum we could include it. -Will Beback 08:40, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Try searching on Alta Vista, Yahoo, etc. it's out there, or visit Glendale, CA. It's used 100s of times a day there.--Softy Papa 19:42, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

This might not be a derogative term against Armenian people, maybe it is an allusion to the so called "Armenian paper". These are small stripes of paper soaked in frankinscense, when the paper is lit, it smoulders slowly and the frankinscense is set free, covering bad odours. So the term "Armenian shower" might refer to someone who does not wash at all but rather cover up with lots of inscense and perfume (this has been common practice among europe throughout centuries when bathing was considered dangerous). The "Armenian paper" was made public by Frenchman Auguste Ponsots in 1885, who claimed he got the idea from Armenia, I do not know, whether this is true or was his marketing. The following link is an online shop in Germany and shows a wrap of "papier d'armenie". http://www.manufactum.de/product/755405/group/169069/dmc_mb3_search_pi1.pos/1/track_flash/0/Produktdetail.1773.0.html

Zipperhead / zip

Derogatory term for any Asian but especially a person of Vietnamese nationality. I have never really understood what it meant but Google tells me it that it supposedly has to do with the way their heads would 'open up' when shot with a high-powered rifle; originally used by American soldiers during the Vietnam conflict. It doesn't seem to be as widespread as I had thought.

Add it, I've heard it used many times, being in the army for 20 years. It's also used fairly regularly in certain neighborhoods.

Add it presuming you have a citation, as described at the beginning of this talk page. Art LaPella 00:29, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Why is "wop" tagged?

I was just wondering why a word so familiar as "wop" has a -tag. What is the citation supposed to support? That such a word exists and that it has the meaning described? But this is well-known. My Oxford English Reference dictionary lists it as, I believe, do most good dictionaries. Its etymology is given at www.etymonline.com. What remains in doubt? garik 18:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

You can tell from my name that I know what wops and dagos are, but if we adopt the standards in the previous paragraph, words like "wop" do indeed need citations to stay here, rather than make exceptions for citations that are easy to find. Exceptions are what feeds the cycle of deletion and re-adding. The citations you described sound good to me. Art LaPella 19:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. It suppose it does help avoid conflict if such exceptions are avoided. Anyway, I've taken the easy route and used Dictionary.com, which is used elsewhere here. garik 20:05, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, colleague. A no-go. dictionary.com is not a valid reference: they are mere aggregators of what theuy grab on 'net. `'mikkanarxi 05:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

The origin of the term "wop" is often said to derive from "with out papers" but this is mistaken. The term "wop" is derived from the Italian word "guappo", meaning a swaggerer, pimp, or ruffian. Here is a relatively decent reference that describes both the mistaken origin and the actual origin: [2]. Can someone update the article to reflect this correction? --70.51.230.254 15:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Also if that reference isn't good enough, here is the American Heritage dictionary's definition [3]:

NOUN: Offensive Slang Used as a disparaging term for a person of Italian birth or descent.

ETYMOLOGY: Italian dialectal guappo, thug, from Spanish guapo, handsome, dashing, braggart, bully, from French dialectal wape, rogue, from Latin vappa, flat wine, scoundrel.

HTH. --70.51.230.254 15:07, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

hebrew

an annoying missconseption for the jewish religion. Needs citation to be added. Also, while I could understand, for example, 'Heeb,' Hebrew proper is the language of Judaism. Now, no one calls Indians 'Dravidians' based on language family, but still, I would disagree that Hebrew is offensive. It could also be noted that Judaism is defined as an ethnic religon, and, thus, the language attached to it, even if it is used with other small branches (I doubt there are any) of the religon could be argued as an appropriate name. One last comment, there are MANY other examples of linguistic names being attached to ethnic groups based on the name of the language. Ever used the term 'semitic'? That is not a specific language, actually a language family, but it gets the idea across. TaylorSAllen 03:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Welcher (also spelled "Welsher") - ethnic slur?

Is "Welsher" actually an ethnic slur against the Welsh, in the sense of "to welsh on a bet"? The supposed explanation ("offensive because it implies that is characteristic of the Welsh people") is unreferenced. The entry cites Dictionary.com, but no origin for the term is given there. Is it actually one of those coincidental expressions, like "niggardly", which sounds as though it should be offensive but really isn't? AdorableRuffian 23:32, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I usually let others argue over what constitutes an adequate citation, but I just added two more citations I found related to this issue. Art LaPella 05:29, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Removed

• Raisin - I removed "raisin" as a slur for black people since the cites don't seem to support the idea that it is used as a slur. The first cite[4] reported that Muhammad said: “You should listen to and obey your ruler even if he was an Ethiopian slave whose head looked like a raisin.” Although in today’s world it would be impolite to compare someone’s head to a raisin there is not reason to think that Muhammad meant this as a slur. The second cite [5] is from a Muslim discussion board where people talk about this saying. No one says that he or she had been ever called a “raisin.” The final outcome of the discussion is that Muhammad said this to address the prejudice that some Arabs might have had against blacks and it was not intended by him as a slur. Steve Dufour 04:45, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
• Tabernaco - It was supposed to be a slur used by Mexicans against French Canadians. I looked it up on Yahoo; it is found on a few French and Spanish language sites, very few; so it must mean something. However it only appeared on two or three English language sites and didn't seem to be a slur in English as far as I could tell. Since the list is supposed to be about words used by English speakers I went ahead and removed it. Steve Dufour 23:37, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
• 925 - I cut this out because the site it linked to said nothing about the person's race:

925

(Southern California) a term for blacks, comes from the Los Angeles Police Department code for "Suspicious Person".

I think you are right. The link is only to a list of radio codes. Nothing about race at all. Steve Dufour 01:02, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

• Bath toy --Worst entry-- might be this one, twice removed and put back:

A person from the Indian Ocean region, originating in 2004 after an earthquake caused a tsunami that killed over 250,000 people.

Cleanup

This article became *HUGE* (192Kb) and requires cleanup and posible split. For starters, I removed foreign-language ethnic slurs. If some of them have noticeable English usage, they may be put into a separate article. `'mikka (t) 18:35, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Good work. Thanks. Steve Dufour 00:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for doing that. For the time being, let me move the material from this page to Talk:List of ethnic slurs/removed entries. That can also hold the unsourced entries. -Will Beback 07:48, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Misc

1. I don't object to the existence of this article in principle, but it sucks horribly. It's full of crap entries, and a lot of the writing is just horrid. People are using it as a dumping ground for something they heard of once (or perhaps even thought of themselves) that once made them guffaw. There should really be a higher bar.
2. fyi, most of the racial slurs on this page are the result of stereotyping. if you don't know the definition/connotation of the word, look it up.138.27.1.2 17:43, 27 September 2006 (UTC)'

No people's names as "examples"

1. "Jewgaboo" (not proper to) apply such ethnic slurs to actual people. I removed the reference to Lenny Kravitz "as an example" in that entry.Smiloid 03:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

   Good work! Following your example I removed a couple from "carpetbagger". Steve Dufour 02:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Worldwide view maintenance tagging

What is the reason for this tag? Looking over the list it seems like much of the world is covered. Of course most of the words are only used in a limited area, and of course only the English language is covered. Should I go ahead and remove it? Steve Dufour 18:19, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I will go ahead and remove it. I can see why a person might not like this article, but that is does not seem like a good reason to me. Steve Dufour 02:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC) p.s. I have the feeling that a lot of the contributions were put in *to* be offensive, not to report other people's offensive language.

I have a feeling your postscript is right on the money. Anyone who helps fix this problem will have my gratitude. My Alt Account 02:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I have a feeling that the problem with this article will not be fixed until human nature itself is fixed. :-) Steve Dufour 03:16, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

This article would not EXIST if human nature was fixed. :P -- JoeB 12:20 PM EST, 16 November 2006

It would be nice...

...if the only people who could add a slur were members of the slurred group and had really had it said to them. Too bad that is not possible. Just a thought. Steve Dufour 04:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

What is really wrong with this article

It's not that it's about slurs. Anything is worth learning about, even derogatory terms. However, can we monitor it so that people don't simply add a newly invented epithet or an arcane term or some endemic word only used in one region. There is no way to monitor this. It's just ridiculous that I can make up anything I want and put it in here and no one can check that for authenticity. This article unfortunately shows where Wikipedia fails as an encyclopedia. Or maybe it doesn't...this article is more about defining word then giving the origin or common uses of the words; therefore it doesn't belong in an encylopedia but in a dictionary. Arthurian Legend 14:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

You'll find similar comments throughout this talk page and its archives. It's not true that "no one can check that for authenticity" - the edit page warning says "Please provide citations for all new additions, or they will be reverted", and every once in a while someone feels like enforcing it. Another never-ending debate is whether this should be a list of slurs or just ethnic slurs, so we spin our wheels a lot adding non-ethnic slurs and deleting them again. Art LaPella 20:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I will go through and remove some of the worst.Steve Dufour 17:09, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

A lot of the words aren't really slurs and quite a few don't even relate to ethnicity. Its become "a list of words someone found interesting." I was editing the entry for farang and it occurred to me that as far as a dictionary definition is concerned, farang just the Thai word for "Caucasian." Of course, sometimes it feels like a slur. Asians are obsessively focused on race. It's farang all the time like you don't have a name, a job title, or any identity other than your race. "Is farang are a slur?" is a common questions newly arrived foreigners ask. I'd have say "no." But since there is a legitimate question, perhaps it deserves a place on the list all the same.Kauffner 10:23, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I mainly removed the American words since that is my culture. Foreign words I tended to leave since I didn't have much of an idea about them. Steve Dufour 01:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Trolling and personal attacks elided

This text is a placeholder for some very long-winded trolling and name-calling that was severely cluttering the talk page. I don't believe anything productive took place in the entire exchange, but I didn't want to go so far as to delete the section.

If you want to see what I took out, it's right here. If we can all agree I'm not depriving us of any opportunity for conversation by redacting it, then this entire section (yes, this text right here) can just be deleted. My Alt Account 08:06, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

This 'list' serves no purpose

This 'list' serves no purpose other than to provide ammunition for those already holding racist views. Also, many of the terms related to Jews and African Americans are clearly fabricated by some racist individual(s) with too much time on their hands. Panda

I agree with you on many. Delete as many as you want, however you will be called names if you do. Steve Dufour 16:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Or else nominate the page for deletion. You have my vote. (However I would prefer to see the rules followed and the article remain since it does contain some good information.) Steve Dufour 21:42, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I am going to slow down on my edits, I can't the only enforcer. Steve Dufour 04:05, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I've been away, but I'll join you in enforcement. Per previous discussions, we might finally get around to splitting the article into sourced content and unsourced content, with the latter moved to a holding page out of the article space. There is no reason to have unsourced content in an article. -Will Beback 20:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I will keep going then. I just took out a few in AB&C. Rather than having an uncited list we could just have a link to one of the sites elsewhere that lets in anything. Steve Dufour 01:20, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for hanging-in there. If we have a list that only contains sourced entries it will be easier to maintain. We just need to get there. The "unsourced list" would just be a holding bin for text so we don't have to delete it all outright. But it should be a talk page subsidiary, like a draft. (i.e. Talk:List of ethnic slurs/unsourced). There has long been a general consensus to pare down the list with one vocal exception, user:Primetime, who was later banned as an energetic and duplicitous plagiarizer. It's time to make the cut. Barring any fresh objections we should proceed promptly with previously announced plans to remove the unsourced entries. -Will Beback 07:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

How to revert the splitting

if anyone wants to stop will beback or anyone else from splitting the article, click on history, then the date of the version u want. the old version will display, so click edit, then save. this is pretty pathetic. they're deleting both unsourced + foreign slurs, so i guess that means all the slurs. i guess they dont give a shit about the keep results of those debates.Ymg55 09:53, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't mean all the slurs. Those in English with some kind of source showing that they are used in the real world are welcome to stay. Steve Dufour 13:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

A suggestion

Perhaps this should be sorted by the group the word refers to, so it is easier to find a word to use in a specific situation. It is much harder this way.

You're looking for List of ethnic slurs by ethnicity. -Will Beback 20:29, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

A Second Suggestion

Consider reverting this page back to an earlier version that is much more complete. The edits over the last couple months have totally butchered the list. For a topic such as this, it is unreasonable to require a citation as a prerequisite for word to be included in the list. See the following page for the list before it was destroyed: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_ethnic_slurs&oldid=55958195

Maybe the list should be elsewhere on the Internet. Steve Dufour 01:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

A round of cleanup

I've just completed a round of cleanup by moving quite a few entries into List of regional nicknames and List of religious slurs, which are clearly non-ethnic. It seems to me that now the list is fairly clean. I have two suggestions, though.

1. Please help fill in my new lists, since they are clearly incomplete. I myself added several out of my head (or, rather, from wikipedia). E.g., much more American states have nicknames for their dwellers, not only Okie and Hoosier.
2. I noticed that a significant part of this list is (quite naturally) terms for African Americans. I would suggest to split them out into a separate list. Comments?

`'mikkanarxi 00:49, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for doing that cleanup. I don't recommend splitting out certain ethnic groups. What would we call the remaining article? "List of ethnic slurs excluding African Americans"? -Will Beback · † · 04:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

No. but in the intro one may write "See List of ethnic slurs associated with people of African origin for ethnic slurs that refer to people of African descent". It is a very natural topic and not limited to African Americans. In fact there are three natural categories and IMO deserve separate articles:

• Slurs for Afroamericans
• Slurs for Jews
• Slurs for "white" people as used by "non-whites".

The usability of information increases when it is structured and categorized. `'mikkanarxi 19:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Are religions ethnicities?

Some people claim they are, some claim they are not, and this also has a repercussion on the entries that are added/removed from the articles. Sure, even in a country where e.g. the population is mostly Christian, the most devote people will probably be object of ridicule or of pictoresque portrayal, there will even be special terms for mocking them , but would those qualify as ethnic slurs? EpiVictor 08:34, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

The current criteria for the list includes:

• For the purposes of this list, ethnicity can be defined by either race, nationality, region, religion, or socioeconomic class.

While I see some benefit to changing this, I also see even more problems. The boundaries of between religion/race/ethnicity/class are fluid and even more so in the field of slurs and slang. Are slurs against Jews religious or ethnic? Are hillbillies a class, a racial group, or an ethnicity? Are Americans an ethnic group? Instead of removing the criteria perhaps we should incorporate broaden the article title: "List of ethnic and religious slurs". -Will Beback · † · 09:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I've been taught that religion is a component of ethnicity, IE an Iraqi Shiite and an Iraqi Sunni are of differant ethnicities simply due to the fact they belong to differant sects. I say to include religion. Bob 27 November 2006

So, is Janet Reno a racist towards Branch Davidians? Is Scientology now a race? I say disambiguate it to religious and ethnic slurs. Calling religions races is nothing more than a ploy by their members to become immune to criticism. Jews are a special case though. There is a distinct and pronounced Jewish race, where as there is no Scientologist race, no Muslim race, no Christian race. Lord Patrick 21:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Das Ubergeigh

I removed this example from the list. If someone feels that it should be returned to the list, there should be an appropriate explanation for what the term means, instead of the non neutral comment that was written formerly. 68.191.41.61 07:21, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Undone revert

Peatbog Sergeant (talk · contribs) reverted the article back to a version before our big cleanup.[6] Unfortunately I didn't notice it for a couple of days.[7] Peatbog is possibly a sock of a banned editor who's done this kind of thing before, so it may happen again. -Will Beback · † · 06:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

HELP NEEDED

I've just trashed the whole old List of ethnic slurs by ethnicity which was 100% unreferenced (actually moved it to List of ethnic slurs by ethnicity/old) and started importing verifiable content from here. Please spare a minute or two to help me here. `'mikkanarxi 03:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

While doing this, I noticed that the List of ethnic slurs used the word "Asian" indiscriminately, even when from the context it is clear that some term is related to, e.g., Chinese (i.e., East Asian). Please review the article and narrow down to East Asian/South Asian/Middle Eastern/Central Asian/Russian (the last is a joke, haha only serious, to show the point). `'mikkanarxi 03:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

And by the way isn't it so that "Asian" itself is an ethnic slur. Some Chinese colleagues told me so. `'mikkanarxi 03:41, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I would assume that what your colleagues refer to is not a racist slur in itself but a device of racism which attempts to create devision or isolation by drawing attention to differences. For example a group of Chinese workers in an American company might constantly be referred to as "those Asians" e.g. "Here's where the development team works, and here's Bruce our Asian developer". It's not that "asian" itself is a slur, it's not actually even being used as a slur as it does not imply anything about the person that isn't true (i.e. they are Asian... At least by the American definition) it's the practise of singling people out, or dividing groups along ethnic lines that is racist. The same could apply if there was a blind worker in the office, constantly referring to the person by their disability would not make the word "blind" a slur but would still be unacceptable. --JamesTheNumberless 12:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

New standards

Will Beback and I have agreed to set standards for exactly what slurs belong in this article. If there is a consensus for these standards, I will help enforce them by deleting entries that don't conform to those standards. If there is a consensus for a different set of standards, I will help enforce that too - I'm proposing these standards mainly so we have something definite to consider, not because I really want to debate their details. But if there is no consensus, then I will continue to let the rest of you re-add and re-delete the same entries over and over and over again - I wouldn't get any satisfaction that way.

1. The current incarnation of List of ethnic slurs is over 90% ethnic, so let's make that part of the standard. I think slurs like "towelhead" refer to a religious requirement rather than an ethnicity, so they should go. Jews should stay as they are both an ethnic group and a religion. Non-ethnic slurs could be moved to places like List of religious slurs.
2. Citations are required. Let's say a wikilink to an article about a slur is a good substitute, if that article has a citation and refers to the ethnic slur sense of the word (unlike banana for instance - or if we disambiguate to banana (person) then there's no citation).
3. Foreign slurs should be included (or systematically excluded). I think including them is the more obvious standard - the fact that this is English Wikipedia means to me that the definitions should be in English, not that we shouldn't have an article on Des Moines or on the Arc de Triomphe for instance, linking to another article on the Place de l'Étoile with several French words. English Wikipedia's goal of explaining the universe to those who speak English isn't served by removing any information with a foreign name.
4. It's not a standard unless everybody knows, and everybody doesn't know without advertising the rules in detail. The rules above, or their revised version, should either be on the edit page 27 times like the existing edit page warning, or else that warning could refer to a more complete text of the rules elsewhere, such as at the beginning of this talk page as at Talk:Big Bang. I'll be happy to write it if I know what to write that the rest of you would support.
5. The new standards would start by deleting all non-conforming entries. In the A's, B's and C's only, non-conforming entries currently include Argie, Banana, Beaner, Bloke, Bong, Brown Sahib, Canto, Chechaco, Chigger, Coconut, Colored, Coloured, and Coonass. Of course many of these are well-known slurs, but if those aren't the rules then we should stop saying they are the rules when deleting, or we won't ever get anything done except re-adding and re-deleting. That argues for using something like #Quarantine above. Art LaPella 08:45, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

That all sounds good to me. If there's a sourced article about the term we might think of adding the source here too. Otherwise I agree with everything. -Will Beback · † · 18:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

"Internal" ethnic slurs?

Should some special kinds of slurs targetted at groups belonging to the same nation but different geographical/cultural background be included? Some examples: the word "Terrone" (present in the list as such) is in the list and it is used by Italians vs other Italians, discriminating on one's region of origin. Similarly, "Bulgarian" or "Turk" is used in Greece as a pejorative vs other Greeks from the N-NE regions. Should such "internal use" slurs be added to the list or is there some ruling specifically excluding them? EpiVictor 23:01, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

The main limit on entries is the availability of reliable sources. For example, what sources could we use for the examples you mentioned? -Will Beback · † · 06:12, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

See the List of regional nicknames. Yes, reliable sources are necessary. Please also keep in mind that this is English language encyclopedia and slurs in Greek language do not belong here, unless they have significant usage in English language, like, e.g., gringo. `'mikka 06:38, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Really? If everyone feels that way, I'll change my policy which says: "Foreign slurs may be included, as long as the definition is in English.". Also see my unanswered #New standards point 3. Art LaPella 07:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I was saying not "definition in English", but "usage in English language". At the very least, I see we already have article about alional slang (although I am inclined to oppose to them), so if someone really wants to include Tamil terms for inhabitants of Bangalore, their place is in the Tamil slang (like we have this very dubious Sri Lankan Tamil slang (despite "wikipedia is not dictionary")). Otherwise we will see a major explosion of this page. `'mikka 07:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree with mikka about this. Documenting slang words in Non-English languages is not a good fit with the goals of the English language Wikipedia, especially when there are such great foreign language Wikipedias and the Wiktionaries. I'd rather see an interwiki link to a Farsi "list of ethnic slurs" than the addition of those words here. However there are words which are some words, like "gringo" or "gajin", which are used as slurs in this language even if they aren't really slurs in their own and those should be included. Perhaps the guideline might say something like "Foreign slurs that have become English language loan words may be included, as long as the definition and sources are in English." -Will Beback · † · 08:37, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Whatever. Give it a few more hours and see if anyone else comments. Art LaPella 20:01, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

They haven't, so I copied the above language into policy. Art LaPella 06:41, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Food metaphors for race - post-deletion cleanup needed

Food metaphors for race was deleted leaving an enormous trace, especially via redirects Banana (person), Egg (person), Oreo Cookie (slang), Oreo (person). Needs cleanup. `'mikka 08:08, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

South Asian Slurs

I did a little clean up on this section since some racists obviously want to make new slurs.

• Paki is the only slur found offensive. PAK is an abbreviation's for Pakistan. Its not found offensive.
• Desi's are mostly people from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Sri Lankans speak Tamil and are commonly not included as Desi's. If you have any questions then please ask instead of changing without knowing. I am from the region and would know about this.

Paki:-Surely the word "Paki" should only be considered a slur (like any name/nickname) when it is used in a derogatory or negative manner? By this twisted logic, does this mean if we call someone from Afghanistan an "Afghani" or someone from Uzbekistan an "Uzbeki" we are being racist? "Stan" as in Pakistan means country or land does it not? So tell me, why is Paki offensive again? And why is it considered racist when not used by a "non south asian"? (So if an Indian calls a Pakistani a Paki its not racist or offensive but if say a white British person does its racist and deeply offensive?!?!?!) Pathetic!

Come off it. The correct term for someone from Pakistan, as you well know, is Pakistani. This is a Nationality, not an ethnicity. Where the word becomes an ethnic slur is where it is used in its British English capacity where it is applied to anybody, typically of a darker than average complexion, who looks South Asian. This term is used irrespective of national origin.--JamesTheNumberless 12:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Um, you don't know anything about Sri Lankans: they are desis. Most of them speak Sinhalese, not Tamil. There are Tamils in India too, and they're very much desi -SlipGun 02:56, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Adequate citations

I would like to add some easily available citations to slurs from the Quarantine, from earlier and bigger versions of the main list, and to orphaned "op. cit.", "loc. cit." and "Ibid." citations. Easily available means without driving to Seattle and without guessing what someone will consider to be an inadequate citation, as at [[8]]. Here are some other online dictionaries that appear in the citations: [9], [10], [11], and [12]. I'm not a career academic or anything, so are these OK? Art LaPella 03:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Does [13] mean [14] is also on the unspecified out list, or does it mean I've lost my consensus? Art LaPella 03:55, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

I've stated before that I don't want to be part of the cycle of re-adding and re-deleting the same slurs, and therefore we should agree on standards for including slurs on the list. But there is no consensus on putting that into practice, and no discussion - some examples above. So I'm unwatching, and doing things that don't require herding cats. Art LaPella 16:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Jew

Are you honestly saying that 'Jew' is offensive? First of all, according to every dictionary I have seen it is listed at least as a synonym for 'Jewish' and the only way to make 'Jewish' plural is to add the 's' to Jew. Someone didn't think that one out. TaylorSAllen 03:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't find what you responded to. Did you mean me and my policy? I was talking about slurs for Jews such as "kike", not the word Jew itself. Art LaPella 06:50, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Article misses a cornucopia of slurs for jew & slur used by jew. Here are some not reflected in the article with use and possible definition given after:

• • Hook Nose, Nickel Nose [15]
  • Big Nose, Heebie, Red/Dead Sea pedestrian [16]
  • Christ/Jesus Killer (Mel Gibson)
  • DIB (Dumb Israeli Bastard)[17]
  • Shylock, Sheister/Shyster (Shakespeare- Merchant of Venice/Othello etc.)
  • Jew-bag [18]
  • Jew/Khazar (as used by nonjew against nonjew & nonjew against jew- the term 'Jew' is itself a slur)
  • Shagitz/Shiksa (as used by jew against nonjew)[19]
  • Yenta (slur against know-it-all jew women)[20] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 128.197.11.30 (talk) 19:15, 12 January 2007 (UTC).

Paddy and Taig

This is mainly directed at the user Mikkalai: Please state your reason for removing Paddy and Taig - when they are neither unsourced nor vandalism. They are both derogatory terms for the Irish, and they have a legitimate place on this list. I'll be putting them back up unless I recieve a satisfactory explanation within the next few days. I'd like to hear anyone else's opinion on this too. Cat Constantine 10:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

This is another example of neither party reading the policy at the top of the talk page, and I'm giving up. Note that Paddy has a wikilink but no citation in that link, and Taig has a citation in its article - thus the policy would exclude Paddy and include Taig. Art LaPella 16:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes Paddy *does* have a citation within the wikilink:

"Paddy, a given name, and a common nickname used in Ireland for the given name Patrick. It is sometimes used as a slang term in British English for an Irish person, although its use as slang is now considered offensive or contemptuous by Irish people. See also Terms of disparagement and Plastic Paddy."

So unless you're telling me that that is not an adequate reference, it *does*, in fact, conform to the policy. Cat Constantine 19:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, having recieved no satisfactory replies, I'm putting them both back up. Any objections? Bring them here, or I'll keeping putting them both up. KTHXBI. Cat Constantine

First of all, please add new talk at the bottom of the talk page, this is the wikipedia way. I simply didn't notice your angry text. Now, to the point. Paddy as an ethnic nickname is not referenced in Paddy. I see it is already referenced in the list. Please add this ref to Paddy as well. Taig: As far as I understant, it is not an ethnic slur: it is a political or religious slur used by one Irish to offend other Irish. Conclusion: Paddy stays (now referenced), but Taig goes into List of religious slurs and List of political epithets unless you show that I am mistaken. `'mikka 20:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, and sorry if I sounded very angry - I'm just eager to resolve this. While Taig *is* a religious slur, the Wikipedia article does state it's also a slur against Irish nationalists - and thus a slur against a ethnic sect, as per the policy governing this article (i.e. those who identify themselves as nationally Irish). Of course, you may delete it if you think this is not enough, and I won't object any further. Cat Constantine 21:54, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Newfie

It's not in the list but many Newfoundlanders find it offensive when said by someone who is not a Newfoundlander. I have a link, but I'm not sure if anyone can access the paper without having a subscription to blackwell-synergy. [21] Anyway, I think Newfie should be added to the list. There is already a page on wikipedia about it being a perjorative.Ctitiquer 05:22, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Ami

(German speaking countries) term for Americans, sounds almost like "army", usually used in the diminutive

I speak German, and I assure you this term is in common usage ("Amis raus!" -- common graffiti in Berlin). The German Wikipedia article for "Ami" mentions it's usage as a slang term for an American citizen, though doesn't provide a souce -- you know, because the term is so ubiquitous. That said, it's not exactly a slur, more simply a term, really, though often with negative connotations due to context. Based on the above, should we move it back in? Zweifel 03:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

And it's on the English wikipedia article Ami as well.

Russki

(Cold War era U.S.) A term referring to citizens of the Soviet Union. From the Russian word русский (pr. "rooskee"), meaning Russian (as in the language).

If it means anything, it was in "Star Trek 4: The Voyage Home". Zweifel 03:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Goombah or Goomba

(US) an Italian American. Occasionally non-offensive.

So the Goombah article is pretty extensive, including a book entitled A Goomba's Guide to Life, complete with ISBN number. Whence the controversy? Zweifel 03:36, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Organization of Article

It's cool that there is a quarantine list, but that's not what I care about. I think this page would be much better if the slurs were grouped by target group (blacks, Jews, etc), rather than alphabetically. Or, it would be more interesting and readable that way. Just a thought. Zweifel 03:19, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Laziness

For many of these, you just have to click on the link and that will take you somewhere. E.g. "wetback" -- will lead to Operation Wetback, with a citation from some Texas legal handbook. Are we that lazy? And it is ridiculous that "Whitey" has to go onto the quarantine list. I mean, come on! Zweifel 03:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Urban dictionary as a reference

I mean it's not a reliable source, it's like a forum. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.99.80.41 (talk) 18:55, 28 January 2007 (UTC).

New Online Resource

If there are any questionable submissions, I encourage editors here to check here before removing them. It's nice because it's a published source. It's not a huge slang dictionary, but it's not tiny, either. Other good resources are Google Books or Amazon's Book Search, although the very best sources are still offline. The latter two sites are useful for ascertaining usage, which is just as good as a cite in a dictionary, in my opinion.--Eeem eem 22( 23:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, a good suggestion. `'mikka 23:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Urban dictionary as a reference

I mean it's not a reliable source, it's like a forum. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.99.80.41 (talk) 18:55, 28 January 2007 (UTC).

New Online Resource

If there are any questionable submissions, I encourage editors here to check here before removing them. It's nice because it's a published source. It's not a huge slang dictionary, but it's not tiny, either. Other good resources are Google Books or Amazon's Book Search, although the very best sources are still offline. The latter two sites are useful for ascertaining usage, which is just as good as a cite in a dictionary, in my opinion.--Eeem eem 22( 23:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, a good suggestion. `'mikka 23:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Sand Nigger

This term is used in the film Three Kings —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.178.85.134 (talk) 04:26, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

I added this term to the article, including a citation. Jerry lavoie 04:12, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Coon

Eh, I don't know where to post this, but the word coon comes from RAcoon. Or at least that's been my experience; in the south, you used to use dogs to hunt racoons, and so when they were used to "hunt" black people in the practice of "coon hunting", it came to meen a black person or a raccoon. Here's a source: http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/natbltn/100-199/nb174.htm.

Your source describes racoon hunting as a sport, and does not describe this as a slur. Jerry lavoie 05:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Nigger Digger

'White' female who likes/loves a 'black' male

They tend to be referred to as BMW (Black Man's Willy/Woman)

This is a social slur with a derogatory ethnic term in its name, but it is itself not an ethnic slur.Jerry lavoie 05:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

ethnic slurs are nothing compared to real racism

Look here people no matter what color or where you from. i dont like racism, ethnic slurs or name calling, but the P-C wackos dont have the right to come here and delete the whole page. i dont like hatred and prejudice as much like you do, and we need to focus on our society obsession with race. im 45 years old person and an american white man (note i said person and american first). i dont feel a racial minority 'deserves' extra treatment, nor a white male gets the privilege while nobody can have it. im not for affirmative action, but not for discrimination. i grew up listenin to ethnic/racial jokes and i may laugh at em cuz they are stupid and came from uneducated people. i knew jokes about my own race and religion, my nationality and gender, and i feel this is how i view myself, but no self-hate as i hold no hate onto others. time to send the P-c nonsense to the historic trash bin. its out of style, but after 40 or 50 years of civil rights and social change, have we in the US moved on beyond racism? today most people know better not to treat others who are different in a negative way to dehumanize them, like the page on racial slurs tries to educate on the power of words. and you know, words dont hurt me unlike racial segregation in public places has hurt millions of americans who happen to have dark skin. i detest it and glad to see that practice gone (as the law put an end to the practice once common in my childhood). i treat everyone equal: women in my job (its always rude and improper to talk sex or grab their bodies, before the feminist womens lib thing or the sex harassment laws came about), respect peoples different religions (im a christian taught to love and care for others ahead of myself) and dont feel those who cant hold a job or have money are 'lazy' (is it snobbery to look down on others not $150,000 a year like myself?). i dont shout jokes about blacks, jews and gay men (i hold differing opinions on homosexuality and same sex marriage, but never want to hurt or poke fun on others over their sexual preference, and tats not my business to know whos gay or lesbian, nor anyones' personal life at home). am i tolerant and consider all people as human beings? yes i do and im a republican who feels our society must advance away from stopidity on race, handicap, class and the like. we are the same inside no matter what and every one needs to compete, study, work hard, be responsible, be mature and be profesional at their career. are we all adults here? it seems some of you never learned by now. my 3 children in their teens dont hold hate in their hearts, and had friends (and dates) of different races. i dont really see that. i dont mind havin them around me, my wife & them. whoever thinks racist ideas on other people, i suggest they just don't like people. - signed: open-minded conservative

This seems like an essay, not a collaborative article edit discussion... perhaps take itt o your user page? Jerry lavoie 05:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Tagging

I am npoving this terrible article which looks to me like an excuse for racists to come out of the woodwork and have a field day. We dont even have an ethnic slur article to tell us what it is. Its just pure offensiveness, SqueakBox 17:13, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

That's your POV. Jerry lavoie 05:37, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Idea: full wiktionary integration

Wiktionary is the right place for these words to be defined, not Wikipedia, although I can see a little value in having this full listing of them here as this article does. As such, I would recommend that going forward Wiktionary entries be created for each term and than each word listed be linked to its wiktionary entry. This makes it clear that most terms do not require their own articles here, just quick dictionary definitions. I also note that a large portion of these words are defined in standard dictionaries such as American Heritage and OED, thus that media is already established formally as an appropriate medium for defining these terms. --70.51.230.254 15:12, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Although undoubtedly well-intended, this suggestion would be difficult to implement and harmful. Not all wikipedia editors are wiktionary editors. Not all want to be (I am an example of this). As well, new editors of this article who do not visit the talk page will not likely put their entry in this format, regardless of the overwhelming precedent set by the rest of the article. I do not think an article should have a central policing authority... a group of users who make an agreement to continously edit the article for a certain style lonng into the future. This would be counter to the collaborative effort concept, and would likely fail as these users eventually lost interest in this article. Perhaps a single banner stating that most terms have a wiktionary entry, followed by interested editors making an effort to put wiktionary entries in for newly-added terms would be a way to meet your intentions without creating the problems I have just pointed out. Jerry lavoie 17:48, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced

Any entry which is nmot sourced is fair game for removal, so please dont revert bringing back unsourced material. Another wikipedia article is clearly not a citation and you cant have one rule for this article and another rule for every other article, SqueakBox 21:55, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Can you propose an alteration of the criteria at the top of this page that would meet your concern? -Will Beback · † · 23:00, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Instead of

"If a slur has a wikilink to an article on that slur, with a citation in that article (referring to the slur, not to some other sense of the word) then the slur may stay on the list, but including the citation in both places would be better." I would either put what is in the hidden text of the article or I would say that

"If a slur has a wikilink to an article on that slur, with a citation in that article (referring to the slur, not to some other sense of the word) then the slur can only stay if that citation from that article is included in this article" or something to that effect,

I have only done down to J so far but would like to continue to the end over the next couple of days, SqueakBox 00:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Note that SqueakBox's version requires a citation in the article regardless of the wikilink - thus we could accomplish the same result without mentioning wikilinks by deleting the entire policy paragraph, if we really want to remove slurs like SqueakBox's list. Art LaPella 06:36, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

I hope Squeakbox is checking the linked entries to see if sources are in those articles. It'd be simpler to fix them now then to have them re-added by uninformed editors later. This list is a magnet for poor entries. -Will Beback · † · 08:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Through the commutative property of notability, it can be assumed that a term with a stand-alone article, or which is defined and sourced in another wikipedia article, has established its notability in that article. The policies of wikipedia should have already been applied and scrutinized as regards that other article. Stating that whenever a wikilink to another article is used, the sourcing information for the inclusion in that article must be reduplicated in the linking article is not a practice that is in use anywhere in wikipedia today. We must assume that sourcing is inherantly transcluded by virtue of the wikilink itself. Your initial comment was that "you cant have one rule for this article and another rule for every other article", and for this very sound reason, your suggestion MUST NOT be incorporated into this article's guidelines. Jerry lavoie 18:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)