Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SkyBoxx (talk | contribs) at 03:26, 1 December 2006 (rv vandalism). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Fuck/Archive 5 was a good article, but it was removed from the list as it no longer met the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. Review: No date specified. To provide a date use: {{DelistedGA|insert date in any format here}}.

Template:FACfailed is deprecated, and is preserved only for historical reasons. Please see Template:Article history instead.

This article (or a previous version) is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination did not succeed. For older candidates, please check the Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations.

Fuck/Archive 5 received a peer review by Misplaced Pages editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: "Fokken HAIL". p2pnet.net. March 22, 2004.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

THIS ARTICLE IS TOO FUCKING LONG

Isn't it?

Archived to history:
September 26, 2005

French Translations

• The Quebec French word "tabernacle", meaning the clergical tabernacle, is often used in the same way as "fuck" in English, except in sexual-related usage. It is only used as interjection, noun or adverb. Other Quebecois-french swear words (which are pretty much all of clergical origin) such as "Christ" or "Calice" are much more versatile.

Note that in Quebec French, English swearwords such as Shit and Fuck are considered to be much less vulgar than if used in the same context for an English speaking person. This is also the origin of the stereotype of French people swearing a lot that many English Canadians have. However, the word Tabernacle (pronounced "tabarnak") is considered to be very vulgar, but not more so than Fuck is in English. - 70.24.29.189 03:58, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

The above should be moved from 5.1 International Homophony to 5.2 Similar Words in other languages. It has ceased being a discussion of the word "fuck"'s application in french, and has become an explanation of the word "tabernaque".

Shouldn't we include the french verb baiser? It actually translates to the word to fuck. You can conjugate it in many ways and use quite a bit of commands. It seems pretty common to be left out especially in a large section TALKING about French uses of Fuck. By the way, Fuck French Canada.

Japanese "fakku"

The article claims that the word ファック (fakku) in Japanese is seldom used to describe intercourse, which is false. Rather, sexual intercourse is typically the most common meaning of this word, as it would be unnatural and impossible to use it with the same wide array of meanings in Japanese as it has in English, and most Japanese people understand it as an American slang term for sex. I've changed the article, if anyone wants to dispute then go ahead.

Vandalism

Somebody vandalized the featured article Mercury (planet) to lead to this article. Could somebody get Mercury back to normal?

The German term "Schuhe ficken" is wrong

I am from Germany and I had to laugh about the German term "Schuhe ficken". There is no such term. The right term is "Schuhe wichsen" for polishing shoes. "Wichsen" is in German a word for masturbation. I think the right term in English is "to jerk off".

Family Guy usage

Reportedly an uncensored use of the word occurred in initial broadcasts of the 2006-07 season premiere of Family Guy on Fox. The story goes that a dubbing error resulted in a use of the word being left unbleeped by mistake in East Coast broadcasts but this was corrected in time for the West Coast broadcast. I read about this on a few newsgroups but obviously there needs to be a more reputable source before adding this to the article. Anyone see any media coverage of this? 23skidoo 13:23, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I read somewhere that the episode went uncensored in Canada and that is where these clips of Family Guy came from. I saw the episode in Florida and it did not say "fuck" when I saw it live so I doubt the East Coast theory. Gdo01 18:31, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

It is on the episode Petarded, where Brian uses the word twice. I have the dvd box set on which it is uncensored, although it should be said that the box set is rated MA15+ (restricted to 15 yrs or older unless accompanied by an adult) in Australia, unlike the other dvd box sets of the series being rated M15+ (recommended 15 yrs or older). I am not sure whether or not it was censored or not on the TV broadcast of the episode, however as Family Guy is shown at 10:30pm on free-to-air tv, it was most likely uncensored. Spec ops commando 08:49, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Contextual Usage

The "contextual usage" section of the article seems utterly useless to me, and has the feel of a giddy immature "Dude! We can say 'fuck' on the Wiki!" piece to me. I think it should be taken out. Comments? - Corporal Tunnel 19:35, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, to me that section (as well as several other parts of the article) sound like that woefully incorrect "History of the F-Word" video. I've gone ahead and removed ones that are variations (fuck, fuck you, fuck yourself) or are just stupid (fuck the fucking fuckers). Motherfucker and Uncle Fucka are already mentioned in See Also, so I've removed them as well. I'd like to see for fuck's sake, fuckhead, and fucktard go as well, but I don't have an idea as to how widespread they are so I've left them. The fact that an Australian Premier is quoted as using fuckwit was enough to tip the balance toward its inclusion, but only just. Fuck off and fuck up, I think, are both widespread and distinct enough to warrant mention somewhere, if not here. Strad 17:25, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

cleanup tag

Cleanup tag added for:

1. Poor quality, in general, of prose. The article devolves into little more than an accumulation of lists toward the end.
2. Weasel word language in explanations.
3. Inconsistent formatting of sub-sections.

- Davodd 20:11, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

The Finnish Equivalent to Fuck

In the finnish language, the word "vittu" is teh equivalent to the word fuck. It can be used to refer to the female sexual organ, it can be used to descirbe somebody/something and it pretty much has all the properties as the word fuck. The largest difference is that "vittu" can't be used to refer to sexual intercourse. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ardzu (talk • contribs) .

Sanskrit and Etymology

I am not a linguist, nor do I have verifiable sources to support my opinion. However, it is my opinion that Fuck is likely to be cognate with the Sanskrit Bhogam and related words, using the following rules Bh -> f, g -> k, final m droppped. Bhogam is a more "refined" word than fuck, and means bliss or ecstacy, either sexual or religious. However, derivative words such as sambhogam (vaginal sex), swayambhogam (masturbation) are, for practical purposes, exclusively sexual. Bhogam also has other cognates which refer to kingship and kingly power, and commanding. So, in addition to the pleasure and sexual aspect of the word, there is also the power/submission aspect which is present in the word fuck as well. Of course this could be a false cognate instead of a genuine one. However, it is perhaps a rather clear false cognate to Indian speakers. I am hoping that someone is able to write this up in a way that I cannot, without it being original research. If not, well, that's the way it goes. 24.91.136.214 11:47, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Spanish translation totally wrong!!!

Hi there.

Reading this article, I notice that the guy who edited the Spanish part comes definitely from somewhere in Latinamerica (or learned South American Spanish). This is of course fine, but there are some things to take into account.

• First of all, the word is misspelled. It is written "coger", not "cojer". Somehow most of southamericans misspell a lot of words. This is one of them.
• Second, the word "coger" in Spain means just "take" (take something, take the bus, etc) or "grab" (grab something). It has never the meaning of "fuck". Only in South America this words means "fuck".

However, note that in english, "take me" spoken by a woman is commonly understood to be an invitation to intercourse (fucking). Wake 06:08, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

IMO, it might be more convenient to modify the article as follows:

In Spanish, the closest translation would be "follar" or "joder". Both of them have the meaning of having sex, and "¡Joder!" as a single word can be also used as an exclamation (like "Fuck!") to show almost everything (surprise, annoy, admiration, etc).

However, in Latinamerican Countries there are other words which are more appropriate: "coger", "cachar" (Peru), "chingar" (Mexico).

My two cents! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.160.247.72 (talk • contribs) .

Unfortunately, most of the Other Languages section is written by foreign speakers who just want to insert some funny words from their language into the article. By all means, take out those parts and add useful, accurate information into the article. Strad 22:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I edited the Spanish section to clean it up a bit and make it a little more balanced. I think it needs more input from people in other countries since I can only attest to translations from continental and Mexican Spanish. Like, where else (besides Europe) do people say follar more commonly than coger? -- 17 Nov 2006

Did someone forget UTFSE?

Or, perhaps the term "Use The Fucking Search Engine" belongs too much in an internet-only context. I figured I'd mention it because I can't edit nor am I sure it belongs here. 68.81.198.36 01:52, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it would probably worth mentioning, if there can be some general consensus as to which variation is most common. On IRC I've encountered it as TAFSE, being "Try A Fucking Search Engine", and I don't recall seeing the UTSFE version before. - Ugliness Man 12:26, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

" fucking search engine" gets a total of 95 returns on Google. That's not nearly enough to warrant any sort of mention. Strad 02:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

1 - 10 of about 17,100 for utfse is enough IMO. 68.81.198.36 03:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC) Anon

In the corporate world, there's also RTFM (Read The Fucking Manual).--SidiLemine 09:38, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Computer/video games

First off, Police Quest IV was most definitely NOT the first game to use the word fuck. A Japanese TurboGrafx-16 game called "Download" released in 1990 used the word one of two random "game over" screens containing english text (the other used "shit") - someone may want to grab an emulator and a screenshot of it for the section, or maybe I will at some point. It was not released outside of Japan, however, which still makes PQ4 the first fully English release I've heard mentioned.

If someone wants to expand the video game sections more and hopefully make a full list of games containing the word fuck there or on a separate page, here are some others:

Fallout ('97, PC/MAC, infrequent) Fallout 2 ('98, PC/MAC, frequent) Fallout Tactics: Brotherhood of Steel ('01, PC, Frequent) (I'm not sure if the console game "Fallout: Brotherhood of Steel" does or not) The Fifth Disciple (PC, '04 in Europe, one use)

The Longest Journey (PC, '00?, maybe oh 5 times) (Again I'm not sure about the sequel)

One other thing that is notable enough to mention is that the Orion Conspiracy game received a Teen rating (as shown on the ESRB's website) despite containing about as much swearing as any other game I've seen. I'm guessing that's only because that was the *only* potentially offensive content in the game - no real violence, etc. It does seem the ESRB went by different rules back then, though. 69.85.181.254 21:09, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Images

I would appreciate it greatly if there were illustrations or photographs accompanying this article. 207.112.75.207 02:39, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Suggestions? --ElKevbo 06:20, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Umm...

I don't know how to write it myself, but could someone add to the list of uses how recently the word has come to replace "Um...". As in "I can't remmember he name fuckinnngggg, Jennifer it think"

The word FUCK

As a history buff one of my teachers told us that the word itself was merely the letters from a King's proclamation who lacked sufficient subjects to tax. His proclamation's heading read, Fornucation Under Commandment of the King, or FUCK. It has been a very long time since I heard this, and do not remember which king. To me it seems more fesible than all the rest that have come since. K. Michaelss — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.217.37.156 (talk • contribs) 17:29, November 7, 2006 (UTC)

No, the various acronyms are popular folk etymologies, but they all date from no earlier than the 1960's and none of them are supported by any actual documentation. -- Vary | Talk 17:46, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

You know, this false etymology is not only covered in the article itself, but has been mentioned at least twice on this very Talk Page. I mean, for fuck's sake, can people not be bothered to read? 87.112.84.95 00:17, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Fuckin' A

As noted in the article, there are two opposing meanings of "fuckin' A", and the article gives preference to the negative one. However, the Urban Dictionary page on fuckin' A overwhelmingly lists positive interpretations of the phrase over negative ones, and also offers a number of potential meanings. Because this is a particularly interesting usage of the word "fuck" perhaps it deserves a bit more attention? Guypersonson 16:18, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Urban Dictionary is one of those sites that's way too unreliable and should never be used as a source for a Misplaced Pages article. That said, I've always known it to be a positive term, I'm just not sure of an encyclopedic way to "prove" or cite this. - Ugliness Man 17:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Ha! People say the same thing about Misplaced Pages's reliability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by D Boland (talk • contribs) 17:13, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Except that on Urban Dictionary, anyone can add anything, and it sticks like glue. Completely unreliable information hangs around forever, horrific spelling is never corrected, and it takes ages to get obvious vandalism deleted. Here, on the other hand, vandalism is often removed within minutes, and people are expected to cite sources for questionable information. Those who compare the two as if they have the same level of reliability usually have no idea how Misplaced Pages works. - Ugliness Man 13:31, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Other Languages Section

I think the the other languages section can be cut entirely. I'm not going to be so bold as to do this right now, but it's just trivia, and we don't need to have EVERY fact about the word in the article. Who disagrees with me and why? I was looking through the talk page, and the only argument for it that I've found is that it is interesting, which doesn't seem like much of a justification to me. If the current practice of including as many homophones and similar words as possible is to be adhered to, then the article is actually quite incomplete, because there are many languages that aren't mentioned in the article. How about a compromise, where the other languages section is changed to Notable Use in Other Languages, which would include a couple of paragraphs of general information at the most, and only use one a minimal amount of examples. Something like, "There are many homophones of fuck in other languages, some of which are derived from the English usage, such as fok in Afrikaans. Many languages also use fuck as an English loanword. The offensive severity of the word in other languages is dependent on culture, e.g. in Japan, sexually derived expletives are considered much less harsh than status derived insults."

Does anybody actually believe this article should have a complete list of every homophone and similar word in every other language? If nobody gives a good argument against this in about ten days (is "because it's interesting/ funny" really a good argument?), then I will drastically change this section, and the whole article will be about 1/3 shorterStephenDBoyd 01:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

I oppose the removal of this material and assert that you have not presented a good reason to do so. I don't understand how you can assert that this word is important in English but similar words in other languages are not important. Perhaps I am misunderstanding you but it just strikes me as very biased. --ElKevbo 03:29, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

My reasoning is that the article is too long; most of the information in the Other Languages section is too trivial for this article; and the Other Languages section is messy, with over 20 bold-headlined subsections. These problems would be resolved by a much shorter restructuring and re-write that would include fewer examples.

You probably misunderstood me, because you have made a little straw man out of what I said. I never said that similar words in other languages are not important, but I will say now that they're not all equally important, and they are not as important as the English usage, for the purposes of this article. Some of the other language information is important enough to be included, but much is not. My proposal may be biased, but I believe that it is an appropriate bias. StephenDBoyd 05:59, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. It's a pretty difficult job to weed out the "important" ones from the "not-so-important" (or complete bullshit) ones but if someone can do it then more power to them. Most of this article is awash in uncited original research anyway and I won't cry or lose sleep if any of it gets deleted. --ElKevbo 06:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps the "Other Languages" section could have its own article. This would shorten the article and separate the material John Reaves 21:56, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea to me. Sabrebattletank

Moved to Fuck in other languages, which was previously a redirect to the Fuck article. Strad 05:21, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

picture

can someone post a picture?

The article "Fuck" should NOT be cleaned

Come on, its an article on Fuck its like making an article on 60's music and failing to mention The Beatles, The Doors, The Rolling Stones, and Jimi Hendrix. If you think it should be cleaned up then I say delete it then, because otherwise you look stupid

• Delisted good articles
• Misplaced Pages featured article candidates (contested)
• Old requests for peer review
• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press