Talk:Seven dirty words

Wikipedia is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options for not seeing an image.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Seven dirty words article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Comedy

	Comedy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy 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.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Freedom of speech Mid‑importance

	Freedom of speech portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Freedom of speech, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Freedom of speech 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.Freedom of speechWikipedia:WikiProject Freedom of speechTemplate:WikiProject Freedom of speechFreedom of speech articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 2021-05-19. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

Later use of the words

I think any unreferenced addition in the Later use of the words section should be removed, there's many that borderline encyclopedic and just "why is this in here". I was going to be bold but adding this won out. Mlpearc (open channel) 23:17, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am not normally inclined to delete content other editors have made the effort to compile, but I agree this is in the wrong place. We don't need a list of every time somebody F-bombed on live TV. It is leading the substance of this article astray. I suggest we create an article something like List of unacceptable language incidents on live broadcast; a list that the 7 words would appear upon. Trackinfo (talk) 06:31, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I agree, it's the kind of thing that can spin out of control and end up dominating the article. I'm going to heavily prune it (maybe to just the first recorded instances or something) very shortly unless someone comes up with a very good reason why not :-) Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 13:11, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of a TFA nomination

In the past, there have been requests that discussions about potentially controversial TFAs are brought to the attention of more than just those who have WP:TFAR on their watchlist. With that in mind: Fuck: Word Taboo and Protecting Our First Amendment Liberties has been nominated for an appearance as Today's Featured Article. If you have any views, please comment at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests. — Cirt (talk) 20:10, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Pinker

Is it worth mentioning the book of the same title by Steven Pinker? http://www.amazon.co.uk/Seven-Words-You-Cant-Television-ebook/dp/B002RI9QCG/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1442866317&sr=8-9&keywords=Steven+pinker 213.104.254.248 (talk) 20:15, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are now 68 swear words that are not allowed on TV

They range from the word "asshole" to the word "wop." http://www.buzzfeed.com/mjs538/the-68-words-you-cant-say-on-tv 2607:FB90:A4EC:F9A5:0:E:EBB8:E601 (talk) 23:41, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These include as well as the classic swear words, ethnic and religious smears and sexual smears. I would suppose that some political smears involving variants of these words (use your imagination or simply recall something that can be done with "Republican" or "Democrat") are on the list.

Rush Limbaugh did get away with "feminazi".Pbrower2a (talk) 09:41, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is beyond the scope indicated by the WP:FIRSTSENTENCE, though the article does currently go beyond that. Also WP:RSP describes buzzfeed as "the least trusted news source in America". Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 09:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FCC internal guidelines

Here, I have removed an assertion saying, ", but it [the FCC] has alleged that its own internal guidelines are sufficient to determine what it considers obscene." That assertion has been tagged {{cn}} since February 2010. In March 2010, this edit replaced an earlier {{cn}} tagged assertion saying ", but it has maintained general guidelines regarding obscenities.", providing no support and leaving the {{cn}} tag then in place.

I did some googling around re the FCC, obscenity, and internal guidelines, and turned up this, which says that if a determination is made by the FCC to investigate a complaint, FCC staff members will often send a Letter of Inquiry ("LOI") to the broadcaster named in the complaint and. after the broadcaster responds to the LOI, FCC staff members must decide whether a violation has in fact occurred. If the staff members conclude that a violation has occurred, they send the broadcaster a Notice of Apparent Liability ("NAL"). The "internal guidelines" connection there is where it says, "and the FCC has internal guidelines for tracking and processing NALs." I didn't think that sufficiently supported the assertion, hence the removal. Perhaps there is a WP:RS out there somewhere which would support an assertion that the FCC has internal guidelines sufficient to determine what it considers obscene but, if so, I haven't found them.

Perhaps this article ought to mention "I know it when I see it", Jacobellis v. Ohio and Potter Stewart. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:25, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed edit of quotation

If the quotation uses "was" instead of "is", shouldn't the auxiliary be "didn't" instead of "don't"? Because "I don't know there was" sounds politically incorrect to me. --Fandelasketchup (talk) 10:56, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Shit piss fuck cunt cocksucker motherfucker tits" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Shit piss fuck cunt cocksucker motherfucker tits and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 3#Shit piss fuck cunt cocksucker motherfucker tits until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Capsulecap ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pasting the text of this thread into https://www.naturalreaders.com/online/ is amusing. (I personally prefer the "Tracy" voice.) E Eng 05:02, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Fart", "Turd", and "Twat"

In George Carlin's special "George Carlin: Again!", he does a follow-up routine titled "Filthy Words" where he further breaks down the seven words as well as mentions some new words to add to the list, those being "fart", "turd", and "twat". My edit got reverted and I must ask is it really not worthy to at least mention this bit briefly? Which is exactly what I did in the aforementioned edit?

This was what I added: Other words that Carlin brought up in his follow-up to the routine, "Filthy Words", include "fart", "turd", and "twat".

Crummymummy (talk) 18:50, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]