Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fuck/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted.

Fuck
To those who say this treatment is too "fucking" long, "fuck you". Just kidding. :-) The fact is that this topic is quite important, given the prominence of "fuck" in English vernacular, and owing to the many and well-covered false etymologies. This work is an encyclopedia. It should contain information that one can find nowhere else, and does. The more controversial interpretations have been substantiated via legitimate references. I can't see anything in the article that is overdone, overblown or superfluous. Since Alan Ginsberg wrote Howl, and Country Joe McDonald let out his "fish cheer" at Woodstock, "fuck" has become one of the most important words in the language.11:30 pm, 3 Oct 2007; User: Doktorschley —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doktorschley (talk • contribs) 05:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Ok.  My apologies if this is a sensitive or controversial topic for anyone. I believe the subject is appropriate for a featured article, but will certainly understand if others disagree. I find this article to be entertaining, informative, and thorough. It meets all the featured article criteria handily with the possible exception of stability. I believe the article has reached the point where major changes are no longer made on a regular basis, but it will be impossible to halt the vandalism from immature individuals that are naturally drawn to articles on vulgarisms. However, wikipedians are generally good at reverting vandalism promptly, and I do not think that should be a bar to featuring such an outstanding article. Indrian 05:51, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * It's pretty fucking long. Some subarticles wouldn't hurt. It also has the feeling of being very repetitive. But that may be because I'm fucking stupid. Everyking 06:00, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Fuck no. Bloat is not brilliance. And I would never support any article that featured the childish picture that adorns this one. F*ck! that.Grace Note 07:07, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The article is all right by itself but I don't think it qualifies for a featured article.   &mdash; J I P | Talk 07:18, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Object: too much list, not enough prose. Filiocht | Blarneyman 07:30, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Object: too many lists, not enough proses. The structure should probably be rearranged - Acronyms section should be further down. Modern use and status could include some of the material from the Popular subsection. Some of the material in that subsection could be left out anyway ("fuck" is rather common in "pop culture"; why does Shaun of the Dead deserve special mention?). Also, I don't object articles because of pictures (unless they are not tagged/grossly inappropriate) but that "Middle Finger" picture is of rather poor quality. Phils 11:13, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * The first picture seems kinda silly to me, since it's just text in image form. Everyking 18:24, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. As much as I love the word fuck, this article just isn't ready. We must give wikipedia a better fucking article, with more quality and less quantity of text. Edit: Fuck. AngryParsley 22:56, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Abstain. I do fucking like this fucking article, but I'm not fucking sure that it should appear on the Main Page, because I'm afraid that there would fucking be a lot of fucking fuckers out there who would fuck with it.  Oh, and you may fucking want to send it to Peer Fucking Review (WP:PR).  Just my fucking $.02.  &rarr;mathx314(talk)(email) 23:36, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Edit: I've noticed that it has gone through WP:PR.  Dunno what to tell you then. &rarr;mathx314(talk)(email) 23:40, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This article needs some trimming. It is overlong, to the point of repetition in places. For such a ubiquitous word, I question the value of the "pop culture" section. I am not too sure we need all those acronyms either, the more widely used should be merged into the popular section and the rest disposed of. The foreign languages section strikes me as a little gratuitous too. Rje 01:31, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - Fuck, fuckity, fuck, fuck, fuck, fuck -- Eric Cartman 02:48, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It's too fucking long. Probably because there's so many meanings.  Is it really necessary to give an example of every possible usage?  Some of the examples aren't very believeable. ("Fucking fucker's fucking fucked!")?? It's too much fun to edit this page so it just keeps growing every time some fuck gets a new idea.  "Fuck" deserves an article but people have gotten a little carried away with this one. So, fuck it.--LStrong2K 02:27, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)